J. 




Book §J/ 






H 



ND DIS- 



campbell's c 

8vo musli 

beverley's b 

New edit 
Camj 

MARTN & BR 

TRCT OF C 
8vo sheej 

JEFFERSON 'S NOTES ON VIRGINIA, 

New edition, with Maps and Plates and new notes, never before pub- 
lished, Svo muslin, - - - - - 

VIRGINIA POLITICS IN 1855, 

With lite and portrait of Cov. Wise, Svo muslin, 

JEFFERSON'S MEMOIR, CORRESPONDENCE AND MISCELLANIES, 
Edited by T. J Randolph, 4 volumes, Svo boards, 

LEE'S REMARKS ON THE WRITINGS OF JEFFERSON, 

New edition, edited by C. C. Lee, 8vo muslin, - 

byrd's westover manuscripts, 

Containing a history of the dividing line betwixt Virginia and N. Carolina, 
Journey to the land of Eden, &c., 1733, 8vo boards, - 

BLAND'S REVOLUTIONARY PAPERS AND MEMOIRS, 
Edited b>K!TTarW^ampb8ll, 2 volumes in 1, Svo % sheep, - __ 

GRIGSBi'S HISTORICAL AND BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF TnE 

VIRGINIA CONVENTION OF 1776, 

BVO muslin, -.--■-- 

EDITH ALLEN, OR LIFE IN VIRGINIA, 
By Lawrence Neville, 12mo. muslin gilt, 



$1 50 



2 50 



2 50 



1 50 



© © © K © 

PUBLISHED BY 

J. ^. RANDOLPH, 

VRGINIAN HISTORY OF AFRICAN COLONIZATION, 

By Rev. P. ^tighter, Bvo muslin, » - - - $ 1 00 

LIFE AND SERMONS OF REV. WJI. DUVAL, 

City Missionary, with portrait, I2m6 muslin, - , ' -*^ 

MAGRUDEB & ORVIS' DEBATE, 

on the punishment of the wicked and the kingdom of Gud, 12mo muslin, 1 25 

FAMILY CHRISTIAN ALBUM, 

Edited by .Mrs. Elam, Bvo muslin gilt, - - - 1 50 

PROFESSOR DEW'S ESSAY ON SLAVERY, , A 

J /*' 
8vo paper, -, - - - . . 50 

- 

. UNCLE ROBIN IN HIS CABIN IN VIRGINIA, AND TOM WITHOUT 
ONE IN BOSTON, 

By J. W Page, 2nd edition with plates, 12mo muslin, - 1 00 

I SOUTHERN AND SOUTHWESTERN SKETCHES, FUN, SENTIMENT, 
AND ADVENTURE, 

12mo paper, ----._ 37 

| BARTLEY'S LAYS OF ANCIENT VIRGINIA, AND OTHER POEMS, 

12mo muslin, - ~5 

PLANTATION AND FARM BOOK, RECORD, INVENTORY AND AC- 
COUNT BOOK, ■ 

By a .Southern Planter, 4to % sheep, - - . 2 00 

RUFFIN'S ESSAY ON CALCAREOUS MANURES, 

5th edition, 12mo muslin, - - _ _ j 25 

RUFFIN'S AGRICUTURAL ESSAY AND NOTES, 

12mo muslin, - - - . . 1 25 




cJ^L 



d. 









;/^ 





■ . * \ 



SCRIPTURAL 



STATISTICAL VIEWS 



tVOK OF SLAVERY, 



THORNTON STRING FELLOW, D. D. 



Touilh edition, vvilh additions. 



J. W. RANDOLPH: 

13 1 MAIN STREET, RICHMOND, V A 
185(3. 






CLEMMITTj'rF.jMtfcfij 



1 



V 



SCRIPTURAL VIEW. 



SCRIPTURAL VIEW 



OF 



S L, i -V "V E E Y . 



Circumstances exist among the inhabitants 
of these United States, which make it proper that 
the Scriptures should he carefully examined by 
Christians in reference to the institution of Sla- 
very, which exists in several of the states, with 
the approbation of those who profess unlimited 
subjection to God's revealed will. 

It is branded by one portion of people, who 
talce their rule of moral rectitude from the Scrip- 
tures, as a great sin ; nay, the greatest of sins 
that exist in the nation. And they hold the obli- 
gation to exterminate it, to be paramount to all 
others. 

If slavery be thus sinful, it behooves all Chris- 
tians who are involved in the sin, to repent in 
dust and ashes, and wash their hands of it, with- 
out consulting with flesh and blood. Sin in the 
sight of God is something which God in his 

Word makes known to be wrong, either by pre- 
a3 



SCklPTUKAL VIEW 

ceptive prohibition, by principles of moral fitness, 
or examples of inspired men, contained in the 
sacred volume. When these furnish no law to 
condemn human conduct, there is no transgres- 
sion. Christians should produce a " thus saith 
the Lord," both for what they condemn as sinful, 
and for what they approve as lawful,, in the sight 
of heaven. 

It is to be hoped, that on a question of such 
vital importance as this to the peace and safety 
of our common country, as well as to the welfare 
of the church, we shall be seen cleaving to the 
Bible, and talcing all our decisions about this 
matter, from it's inspired pages. With men from 
the North, I have observed for many years a 
palpable ignorance of the divine will, in reference 
to the institution of slavery. I have seen but a 
few who made the Bible their study, that had 
obtained a knowledge of what it did reveal on 
this subject. Of late their denunciation of sla- 
very as a sin, is loud and long. 

I propose, therefore, to examine the sacred vol- 
ume briefly, and if I am not greatly mistaken, I 
shall be able to make it appear that the institu- 
tion of slavery has received, in the first place, 

1st. The sanction of the Almighty in the 
Patriarchal age. 

2d. That it was incorporated into the only 
National Constitution which ever emanated from 
God. 

3d. That its legality was recognized, and its 



Ot SLAVERY. 7 

relative duiies regulated, b} r Jesus Christ in his 
kingdom ; and 

4th. That it is full of mercy. 

Before I proceed further, it is necessary that 
the terms used to designate the tiling, be defined. 
It is not a name, hut a thing, that is denounced 
as sinful ; because it is supposed to be contrary 
to, and prohibited by the Scriptures. 

Our translators have used the term servant, to 
designate a state in which persons were serving, 
leaving us to gather the relation between the 
party served, and the party rendering the service, 
from other terms. The term slave, signifies with 
us, a definite state, condition, or relation, which 
state, condition, or relation, is precisely that one 
which is denounced as sinful. This state, condi- 
tion, or relation, is that in which one human 
being is held without his consent, by another, as 
property ;* to be bought, sold, and transferred, 
together with increase, as property forever. Now, 
this precise tiling, is denounced by a portion of 
the people of these United States, as the greatest 

*The property in slaves in the United States is their service or lalor. The 
Constitution guarantees this property to its owner, both in apprentices and 
slaves. And the supreme court lias decided, Judge Baldwin presiding, that all 
the means li necessary and pn per "to secure this property, may be cnnsiitu o - 
ally used by the master, in the absence of all statute law. The Roman law 
made the slave of that law, to he, not a personal chattle, held to service or lal or 
only as is the American apprentice or slave, but to be a mere thing; and guar- 
anteed to the master tile right to do with that mere thing, just as he pleased. — 
To cut it up. for instance, as the master sometimes did, to Iced ti>hes. 

Abolitionists are L'uilty of the inexcusable wickedness of holding up this 
ancient Roman slavery, as a model of American" slavery. Although they knew, 
that the persona! rights of apprentices and slaves, are as well defined and se 
cured, by judicial decisions and statute laws, as the rights of husband and wife, 
parent and child." 

a4 



8 SCRIPIUHAL VIEW 

individual and national sin that is among us, and 
is thought to be so hateful in the sight of God, 
as to subject the nation to ruinous judgments, if 
it be not removed. Now, I propose to show from 
the Scriptures, that this state, condition, or rela- 
tion, did exist in the patriarchal age, and that 
the persons most extensively involved in the sin, 
if it be a sin, are the very persons who have been 
singled out by the Almighty, as the objects of his 
special regard — whose character and conduct ho 
has caused to be held up as models for future 
generations. Before we conclude slavery to be a 
thing hateful to God, and a great sin in his sight, 
it is proper that we should search the records lie 
has given us, with care, to see in what light he 
has looked upon it, and find the warrant for con- 
cluding, that we shall honor him by elforts to 
abolish it ; which efforts, in their consequences, 
may involve the indiscriminate slaughter of the 
innocent and the guilty, the master and the ser- 
vant. We all believe him to be a Being who is 
the same yesterday, to-day, and forever. 

The first recorded language which Avas ever 
uttered in relation to slavery, is the inspired lan- 
guage of Noah. In God's stead he says, "Cursed 
be Canaan ;" "a servant of servants shall lie be 
to his brethren." "Blessed be the Lord God of 
Shem ; and Canaan shall be his servant." "God 
shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the 
tents of Shem ; and Canaan shall be his servant," 
Gen. ix : 25, 26, 27. Here, language is used, 
showing the favor which God would exercise to 



OF SLAVERY. Vt 

the posterity of Shorn and Japheth, while they 

were holding the posterity of Hani in a state of 
abject bondage. May it not be said in truth, that 
God decreed this institution before it existed ; and 
has lie not connected its existence with prophetic 
tokens of special favor, to those who should be 
slave owners or masters? He is the same God 
now, that he was when he gave these views of 
his moral character to the world ; and unless the 
posterity of Shem and Japheth, from whom have 
sprung the Jews, and all the nations of Europe 
and America, and a great part of ' Asia, (the 
African race that is in them excepted,) — I say, 
unless they are all dead, as well as the Canaanites 
or Africans, who descended from Ham, then it is 
quite possible that his favor may now be found 
with one class of men who are holding another 
class in bondage. Be this as it may, God decreed 
slavery — and shows in that decree, tokens of 
good-will to the master. The sacred records 
occupy but a short space from this inspired ray 
on this subject, until they bring to our notice, a 
man that is held up as a model, in all that adorns 
human nature, and as one that God delighted to 
honor. Tin's man is Abraham, honored in the 
sacred records, with the appellation, "Father" of 
the "faithful." Abraham was a native of Ur, of 
the Ghaldees. From thence the Lord called him 
to go to a country which he would show him ; 
and he obeyed, not knowing whither he went. 
He stopped for a time at Haran, where his father 
died. From thence he " took Sarai his wife, and 



]0 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that 
they had gathered, and the souls they had gotten 
in Haran, and they went forth to go into the 
land of Canaan." — Gen. xii : 5. 

All the ancient Jewish writers of note, and 
Christian commentators agree, that by the "souls 
they had gotten in Haran," as our translators 
render it, are meant their slaves, or those persons 
they had bought with their money in Haran. In 
a few years after their arrival in Canaan, Lot 
with all he had was taken captive. So soon as 
Abraham heard it, he armed three hundred and 
eighteen slaves that were born in his house, and 
retook him. How great must have been the en- 
tire slave family, to produce at this period of 
Abraham's life, such a number of young slaves 
able to bear arms. — Gen. xiv: 14. 

Abraham is constantly held up in the sacred 
story, as the subject of great distinction among 
the princes and sovereigns of the countries in 
which he sojourned. This distinction was on 
account of his great wealth. When he proposed 
to buy a burying-ground at Sarah's death, of the 
children of Beth, he stood up and spoke with 
great humility of himself as "a stranger and 
sojourner among them," (Gen. xxiii: 4,) desirous 
to obtain a burying-ground. But in what light 
do they look upon him ? " Hear us, my Lord, 
thou art a mighty prince among us." — Gen. xxiii: 
6. Such is the light in' which they viewed him. 
What gave a man such distinction among such a 
people? Not moral qualities, but great wealth, 



OF SLAVERY. 1 I 

and its inseparable concomitant, power. "When 
the famine drove Abraham to Egypt, he received 
the highest honors of the reigning sovereign. 
This honor at Pharaoh's court, was called forth 
by the visible tokens of immense wealth. In 
Genesis xii : 15, 16, we have the honor that was 
shown to him, mentioned, with a list of his prop- 
erly, which is given in these words, in the 16th 
verse : "He had sheep, and oxen, and he-asses, 
and men-servants, and maid-servants, and she- 
asses, and camels." The amount of his flocks 
may be inferred from the -number of slaves 
employed in tending them. They were those he 
brought from Ur of the Chaldees, of whom the 
three hundred and eighteen were born ; those 
gotten in Haran, where he dwelt for a short time, 
and those which he inherited from his father, 
who died in Haran. When Abraham went up 
from Egypt, it is stated in Genesis xiii : 2, that 
lie was "very rich," not only in flocks and slaves, 
but in " silver and gold" also. 

After the destruction of Sodom, we see him 
sojourning in the kingdom of Gerar. Here he 
.received from the sovereign of the country, the 
honors of equality; and Abimelech, the king, (as 
Pharoah had done before him,) seeks Sarah for a 
wife, under the idea that she was Abraham's 
sister. When his mistake was discovered, he 
made Abraham a large present. Keason will tell 
us, that in selecting the items of this present, 
Abimelech was governed by the visible indica- 
tions of Abraham's preference in the articles of 
a6 



12 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

wealth — and that above all, lie would present 
him with nothing which Abraham's sense of 
moral obligation would not allow him to own. 
Abimelech's present is thus described in Gen. xx : 
14, 16, "And Abimelech took sheep, and oxen, 
and men-servants, and women-servants, and a 
thousand pieces of silver, and gave them unto 
Abraham." This present discloses to us what 
constituted the most highly prized items of 
wealth, among these eastern sovereigns in Abra- 
ham's day. 

God had promised Abraham's seed the land of 
Canaan, and that in his seed all the nations of 
the earth should be blessed. He reached the age 
of 85, and his wife the age of 75, while as yet, 
they had no child. At this period, Sarah's 
anxiety for the promised seed, in connection with 
her age, induced her to propose a female slave of 
the Egyptian stock, as a secondary wife, from 
which to obtain the promised seed. This alliance 
soon puffed the slave with pride, and she became 
insolent to her mistress — the mistress complained 
to Abraham, the master. Abraham ordered 
Sarah to exercise her authority. Sarah did so, 
and pushed it to severity, and the slave abscond- 
ed. The divine oracles inform us, that the angel 
of God found this runaway bond-woman in the 
wilderness; and if God had commissioned this 
angel to improve this 'opportunity of teaching 
the world how much he abhorred slavery, he 
took a bad plan to accomplish it. For, instead 
of repeating a homily upon doing to others as we 



OF &i\A\ EM . 13 

"would they should do mito us," and heaping 
reproach upon Sarah, as a hypocrite, and Abra- 
ham as a tyrant, and giving Hagar direction how 
she might get into Egypt, from whence (accord- 
ing to Abolitionism) she had been unrighteously 
sold into bondage, the angel addressed her as 
'•'Hagar, Sarah's maid," Gen. xvi: 1, 9; (thereby 
recognizing the relation of master and slave,) 
"and asks her, "whither wilt thou go?" and she 
said "I flee from the face of my mistress." Quite 
a wonder she honored Sarah so much as to call 
her mistress; but she knew nothing of abolition, 
and God by his angel did not become her 
teacher. 

We have now arrived at what may be called 
an abuse of the institution, in which one person 
is the property of another, and under their con- 
trol, and subject to their authority without their 
consent; and if the Bible be the book, which 
proposes to furnish the case which leaves it with- 
out doubt that God abhors the institution, here 
Ave are to look for it. What, therefore, is the 
doctrine in relation to slavery, in a case in which 
a rigid exercise of its arbitrary authority is called 
forth upon a helpless female; who might use a 
strong plea for protection, upon the gn>und of 
being the master's wife. In the face of this case, 
which is hedged around with aggravations as if 
God designed by it to awaken all the sympathy 
and all the abhorrence of that portion of man- 
kind, who claim to have more mercy than God 
himself— but I say, in view of this strong case, 



II SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

what is the doctrine taught? Is it that God 
abhors the institution of slavery; that it is a 
reproach to good men ; that the evils of the insti- 
tution can no longer be winked at among saints; 
that Abraham's character must not be transmit- 
ted to posterity, with this stain upon it ; that 
Sarah must no longer be allowed to live a stran- 
ger to the abhorrence God has for such conduct 
as she has been guilty of to this poor helpless 
female? I say, what is the doctrine taught? Is 
it so plain that it can be easily understood ? and 
does God teach that she is a bond-woman or 
slave, and that she is to recognize Sarah as her 
mistress, and not her equal — that she must re- 
turn and submit herself unreservedly to Sarah's 
authority? Judge for yourself, reader, by the 
angel's answer: "And the angel of the Lord 
said unto her, Return unto thy mistress, and 
submit thyself under her hands." — Gen. xvi: 9. 
But, says the spirit of abolition, with which 
the Bible has to contend, you are building your 
house upon the sand, for these were nothing but 
hirecf servants ; and their servitude designates no 
such state, condition, or relation, as that, in 
which one person is made the property of 
another; to be bought, sold, or transferred for- 
ever. To this, we have two answers in reference 
to the subject, before (jiving the law. In the first 
place, the term servant, in the schedules of prop- 
erty among the patriarchs, does designate the 
state, condition, or relation in which one person 
is the legal property of another, as in Gen. xxiv: 



01 SLAVERY 



35, 36. Here Abraham's servant, who had been 
sent by his master to get a wife for his son Isaac, 
in order to prevail with the woman and her 
family, states, that the man for whom lie sought 
a bride, was the son of a man whom God had 
greatly blessed with riches ; which he goes on to 
enumerate thus, in the 35th verse: "He hath 
given him flocks, and herds, and silver, and gold, 
and men-servants, and maid-servants, and camels, 
and asses;" 4hen in verse 3Gth, he states the dis- 
jtosition his master had made of his estate: "My 
master's wife bare a son to my master when she 
was old, and unto him he hath given all that he 
hath." Here, servants are enumerated with sil- 
ver and gold as part of the patrimony. And, 
reader, bear it in mind ; as if to rebuke the 
doctrine of abolition, servants are not only inven- 
toried as property, but as property which God 
had given to Abraham. After the death of Abra- 
ham, we have a view of Isaac at Gerar, when he 
had come into the possession of this estate; and 
this is the description given of him : " And the 
man waxed great, and went forward, and ' grew 
until he became very great; for he had possession 
of flocks, and possession of herds and great store of 
servants." — Gen. xxvi : 13, 14. This state in 
which servants are made chattels, he received as 
an inheritance from his father, and passed to his 
son Jacob. 

Again, in Genesis xvii, we are informed of a 
covenant God entered into with Abraham ; in 
which he stipulates to be a God to him and his 



1G SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

seed, .(not his servants.) and to give to his seed 
the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession. 
He expressly stipulates, that Abraham shall put 
the token of this covenant upon every servant 
born in his house, and upon every servant bought 
with his money of any stranger. — Gen. xvii : 12, 
13. Here again servants are property. Again, 
more than four hundred years afterwards, we find 
the seed of Abraham, on leaving Egypt, directed 
to celebrate the rite, that was ordained as a me- 
morial of their deliverance, viz : the Passover 
at which time the same institution which makes 
property of 'men and women, is recognized, and the 
servant bought zvith money, is given the privilege 
of partaking, upon the ground of his being cir- 
cumcised by his master, while the hired servant, 
over whom the master had no such control, is 
excluded until he ■voluntarily submits to circum- 
cision; showing clearly that the institution of 
involuntary slavery then carried with it a right, 
on the part of a master to choose a religion for 
the servant who was his money, as Abraham did, 
by God's direction, when he imposed circumcision 
on those he had bought with his money, — when 
he was circumcised himself, with Ishmael his son, 
who was the only individual beside himself, on 
whom he had a right to impose it, except the 
bond-servants bought of the stranger with his 
'money, and their children born in his house. 
The next notice we have of servants as property, 
is from God himself, when clothed with all the 
visible tokens of his presence and glory, on the 



OF SLAVERY. 17 

top of Sinai, when lie proclaimed his law to the 
millions that surrounded its base: "Thou shalt 
not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not 
covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his man-servant, 
nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor 
anything that is thy neighbor's." — Ex. xx : 17. 
Here is a patriarchal catalogue of property, 
having God for its author, the wife among the 
rest, who was then purchased, as Jacob purchased 
his two, by fourteen years' service. Here the term 
servant, as used by the Almighty, under the cir- 
cumstances of the case could not be understood by 
these millions, as meaning anything but property, 
because the night they left Egypt, a few weeks 
before, Moses, by divine authority, recognized 
their servants as property, which they had bought 
with their money. 

2d. In addition to the evidence from the con- 
text of these, and various other places, to prove 
the term servant to be identical in the import of 
its essential particulars with the term slave 
among us, there is unquestionable evidence, that 
in the patriarchal age, there are two distinct states 
of servitude alluded to, and which are indicated 
by two distinct terms, or by the same term, and 
an adjective to explain. 

These two terms are first, servant or bond-ser- 
vant ; second, hireling or hired servant; the ffrsj 
indicating involuntary servitude; the second. 
voluntary servitude for stipulated wages, and a 
specified time. Although this admits of the 
clearest proof under the laic, yet it admits of proof 



18 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

before the law was given. On the night the 

Israelites left Egypt, which was before the law 
was given, Moses, in designating the qualifica- 
tions necessary for the Passover, uses this lan- 
guage, — Exod. xii : 44, 45: "Every man's ser- 
vant that is bought for money, when thou hast 
circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof. A 
foreigner and an hired servant shall not eat 
thereof." This language carries to the human 
mind, with irresistible force, the idea of two 
distinct states — one a state of freedom, the other a 
state of bondage : in one of which, a person is 
serving with his consent for wages ; in the other 
of which a person is serving without his consent, 
according to his master's pleasure. 

Again, in Job iii, Job expresses the strong 
desire he had been made by his afflictions to feel, 
that he had died in his infancy. "For now," says 
he, "should I have lain still and been quiet, I 
should have slept : then had I been at rest. 
There (meaning the grave) the wicked cease from 
troubling, and there the weaiy be at rest. There 
the prisoners rest together; they hear not the 
voice of the oppressor. The small and the great 
are there, and the servant is free from his mas- 
ter."— Job iii : 11, 13, 17, 13, 19. Now, I ask 
any common-sense man to account for the expres- 
sion in this connection, " there the servant is free 
irom his master." Afflictions are referred to, 
arising out of states or conditions, from which 
ordinarily nothing but death brings relief. Death 
puts an end to afflictions of body that are incura- 



01? SLAVERY. 10 

h\e, as lie took li is own to be, and therefore lie 
desired it. 

The troubles brought on good men by a wicked 
persecuting world, last for life; but in death the 

■wicked cease from troubling, — death ends that 
relation or state out of which such troubles grow. 
The prisoners of the oppressors, in that age, stood 
in a relation to their oppressor, which led the 
oppressed to expect they would hear the voice of 
the oppressor until death. But death broke the 
relation, and was desired, because in the grave 
they would hear his voice no more. 

All the distresses growing out of inequalities 
in human condition ; as wealth and power on oue 
side, and poverty and weakness on the other, 
were terminated by death ; the grave brought 
both to a level : the small and the great are there, 
and there, (that is, in the grave,) lie adds, the 
servant is free from his master; made so, evi- 
dently, by death. The relation, or state out of 
which his oppression had arisen, being destroyed 
by death, he would be freed from them, because 
he would, by death, be freed from his master who 
inflicted them. This view of the case, and this 
only, will account for the use of such language. 
But upon a supposition that a state or relation 
among men is referred to, that is voluntary, such 
as that between a hired, servant and his employer 
that can be dissolved at the pleasure of the servant, 
the language is without meaning, and perfectly 
unwarranted ; while such a relation as that of in- 
voluntary and hereditary servitude, where the mas- 



•20 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

ter had unlimited power over his servant, ami in 
an age when cruelty was common, there is the 
greatest propriety in making the servant or slave, 
a companion with himself, in affliction, as well as 
the oppressed and afflicted, in every class where 
death alone dissolved the state or condition, out of 
which their afflictions grew. Beyond all doubt, 
this language refers to a state of hereditary bon- 
dage, from the afflictions of which, ordinarily, 
nothing in that day brought relief but death. 

Again, in chapter 7th, he goes on to -defend 
himself in his eager desire for death, in an address 
to God. He says, it is natural for a servant to 
desire the shadow, and a hireling his wages : "As 
the servant earnestly desireth the shadow, and 
as the hireling looketh for the reward of his 
work," so it is with me, should be supplied. — Job 
vii: 2. Now, with the previous light shed upon 
the use and meaning of these terms in the 
patriarchal Scriptures, can any man of candor 
bring himself to believe that two states or con- 
ditions are not here referred to, in one of which, 
the highest reward after toil is mere rest; in the 
other of which, the reward was wages ? And 
how appropriate is the language in reference to 
these two states. 

The slave is represented as earnestly desiring 
the shadow, because his condition allowed him no 
prospect of anything more desirable ; but the 
hireling as looking for the reward of his icoi-Jc, 
because that will be an equivalent for his fatigue. 

So Job looked at death, as being to his body 



OF SLAVERY 



21 



as the servant's shade, therefore he desired it ; 
and like the hireling's wages, because beyond the 
grave, he hoped to reap the fruit of his doings. 
Again, Job (xxxi :) finding himself the subject of 
suspicion (see from verse 1 to 30) as to the recti- 
tude of his past life, clears himself of various 
sins, in the most solemn manner, as unchastity, 
injustice in his dealings, adultery, contempt of 
his servants, unkindness to the poor, covetousness, 
the pride of wealth, &c. And in the 13th, 14th, 
and lfth verses, he thus expresses himself: "If I 
did despise the cause of my man-servant, or my 
maid-servant, when they contended with me, 
what then shall I do when God rises up ? and 
when he visiteth, what shall I answer him ? Did 
not he that made me in the womb, make him? 
And did not one fashion us in the womb?" 
Taking this language in connection with the 
language employed by Moses, in reference to the 
institution of involuntary servitude in that age, 
and especially in connection with the language 
which Moses employs after the law was given, and 
what else can be understood, than a reference to 
a class of duties that slave owners felt themselves 
above stooping to notice or perform, but which, 
nevertheless, it was the duty of the righteous man 
to discharge : for whatever proud and wicked men 
might think of a poor servant that stood in his 
estate, on an equality with brutes, yet, says Job, he 
that Baade me, made them, and if I despise their 
reasonable causes of complaint, for injuries which 
they are made to suffer, and for the redress of 



SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

which I only can be appealed to, then what shall I 
do, and how shall I fare, when I carry my causes 
of complaint to him who is my master, and to 
whom only I can go for relief? When he visiteth 
me for despising their cause, Avhat shall I answer 
him for despising mine? He means that he would 
feel self-condemned, and would he forced to admit 
the justice of the retaliation. But on the supposi- 
tion that allusion is had to hired servants, who 
were voluntarily working for wages agreed upon, 
and who were the subjects of rights for the predion 
of which, their appeal would be to " the judges in 
the gate," as much as any other class of men, 
then there is no point in the statement. For 
doing that which can be demanded as a legal 'right, 
gives us no claim to the character of merciful 
benefactors. Job himself was a great slave-holder, 
and, like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, won no 
small portion of his claims to character with God 
and men from the manner in which he discharged 
his duty to his slaves. Once more: the conduct 
of Joseph in Egypt, as Pharaoh's counsellor, 
under all the circumstances, proves him a friend 
to absolute slavery, as a form of government 
better adapted to the state of the world at that 
time, than the one which existed in Egypt ; for 
certain it is, that he peaceably effected a change 
in the fundamental law, by which a state, condi- 
tion, or relation between Pharaoh and the Egyp- 
tians was established, which answers to th^ one 
now denounced as sinful in the sight of God. 
Being warned of God, he gathered up all the 



OF SLAVERY. 26 

surplus grain in the years of plenty, and sold it 
out in the years of famine, until lie gathered up 
all the money; and when niouey failed, the 
Egyptians came and said, " Give us bread ;" and 
Joseph said, "Give your cattle, and I will give 
for your cattle, if money fail." When that year 
was ended, they came unto him the second year, 
aud said, "There is not aught left in sight of my 
Lord, hut our bodies and our lands. Buy us and 
our lands for bread." And Joseph bought all the 
land of Egypt for Pharoah. 

So the land became Pharoah's, and as for the 
people, he removed them to cities, from one end 
of the borders of Egypt, even to the other end 
thereof. Then Joseph said unto the people, 
"Behold! I have bought you this day, and your 
land for Pharoah;" and they said, "we will be 
Pharoah's servants." — See Gen. xlvii : 14, 16, 19, 
20, 21, 23, 25. Having thus changed the funda- 
mental law, and created a state of entire depen- 
dence and hereditary bondage, he enacted in his 
sovereign pleasure, that they should give Pharoali 
one part, and take the other four parts of the pro- 
ductions of the earth to themselves. How far the 
hand of God was in this overthrow of liberty, I 
will not decide; but from the fact that he has 
singled out the greatest slaveholders of that 
age, as the objects of his special favor, it would 
seem that the institution was one furnishing 
great opportunities to exercise grace and glorify 
God, as it still does, where its duties are faith- 
fully discharged. 



21 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

I have been tedious on this first proposition, 
hut I hope the importance of the subject to 
Christians as well as to statesmen will he my 
apology. I have written it, not for victory over 
an adversary, or to support error or falsehood, 
but to gather up God's Avill in reference to hold- 
ing men and women in bo?idage,in the patriarclial 
age. And it is clear, in the first place, that God 
decreed this state before it existed. Second. It 
is clear that the highest manifestations of good- 
will which he ever gave to mortal man, was 
given to Abraham, in that covenant in which he 
required him to circumcise all his male servants, 
tuhich he had bought with his money, and that were 
born of them in his house. Third. It is certain 
that he gave these servants as property to Isaac. 
Fourth. It is certain that, as the owner of these 
slaves, Isaac received similar tokens of God's 
favor. Fifth. It is certain that Jacob, who in- 
herited from Isaac his father, received like tokens 
of divine favor. Sixth. It is certain, from a fair 
construction of language, that Job, who is held 
up by God himself as a model of human perfec- 
tion, was a great slaveholder. Seventh. It is cer- 
tain, when God showed honor, and came down to 
bless Jacob's posterity, in taking them by the 
hand to lead them out of Egypt, they were the 
oiuners of slaves that toere bought with money, and 
treated as property ; which slaves were allowed of 
God to unite in celebrating the divine goodness 
to their masters, while hired servants were exclu- 
ded. Eighth. It is certain that God interposed to 



' 



OF SLAVERY. 2o 

give Joseph the power in Egypt, which he used, 
to create a state, or condition, among the 
Egyptians, which substantially agrees with, palri- 
archal and modem slavery. Ninth. It is certain, 
that in reference to this institution in Abraham's 
family, and the surrounding nations, for five 
hundred years, it is never censured in any com- 
munication made from God to men. Tenth. It 
is certain, when God put a period to that dispen- 
sation, lie recognized slaves as propertg on Mount 
Sinai. If, therefore, it has become sinful since, 
it cannot be from the nature of the thing, but from 
the sovereign pleasure of God in its prohibition. 
We will therefore proceed to our second proposi- 
tion, which is — 

Second. That it was incorporated in the only na- 
tional constitution emanating from the Almighty. 
By common consent, that portion of time stretch- 
ing from Noah, until the law was given to Abra- 
ham's posterity, at Mount Sinai, is called the 
patriarchal age ; this is the period we have re- 
viewed, in relation to this subject. From the 
giving of the law until the coming of Christ, is 
called the Mosaic or legal dispensation. From 
the coming of Christ to the end of time, is called 
the Gospel dispensation. The legal dispensation 
■is the period of time, we propose now to examine, in 
reference to the institution of involuntary and 
hereditary slavery; in order to ascertain, whether, 
during this period, it existed at all, and if it did 
exist, whether with the divine sanction, or in 
violation of the divine will. This dispensation is 



26 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

called the legal dispensation, because it was the 
pleasure of God to take Abrabram's posterity by 
miraculous power, then numbering near three 
millions of souls, and give them a written consti- 
tution of government, a country to dwell in, and 
a covenant of special protection and favor, for 
their obedience to his law until the coming of 
Christ. The laws which he gave them emanated 
from his sovereign pleasure, and were designed, 
in the first place, to make himself known in his 
essential perfections; second, in his moral charac- 
ter; third, in his relation to man; and fourth, to 
make known those principles of action by the 
exercise of which man attains his highest moral 
elevation, viz: supreme love to God, and love to 
others as to ourselves. 

All the law is nothing but a preceptive exem- 
plification of these two principles ; consequently, 
the existence of a precept in the law, utterly 
irreconcilable with these principles, would destroy 
all claims upon us for an acknowledgment of its 
divine original. Jesus Christ himself has put 
his finger upon these two principles of human 
conduct, (Dent, vi: 5 — Levit. xix: 18,) revealed 
in the law of Moses, and decided, that on them 
hang all the law and the prophets. 

The Apostle Paul decides in reference to the 
relative duties of men, that whether written out 
in preceptive form in the law or not, they are all 
comprehended in this saying, viz: "thou shalt 
love thy neighbor as thyself." With these views 
to guide us,«as to the acknowledged design of the 



OF SLAVERY. 2t 

law, viz : that of revealing the eternal principles 

of moral rectitude, by which human conduct is 
to be measured, so that sin may abound, or be 
made apparent, and righteousness be ascertained 
or known, we may safely conclude, that the insti- 
tution of slavery, which legalizes the holding one 
person in bondage as property forever by another, 
if it be morally wrong, or at war with the princi- 
ple which requires us to love God supremely, and 
our neighbor as ourself, wall, if noticed at all in 
the law, be noticed, for the purpose of being con- 
demned as sinful. And if the modern views of 
abolitionists be correct, we may expect to find the 
institution marked with such tokens of divine 
displeasure., as will throw all other sins into the 
shade, as comparatively small, when laid by the 
side of this monster. What, then, is true? has 
God ingrafted hereditary slavery upon the consti- 
tution of government he condescended to give 
his chosen people — that people, among whom he 
promised to dwell, and that he required to bo 
holy? I answer, he has. It is clear and explicit. 
He enacts, first, that his chosen people may take 
their money, go into the slave markets of the 
surrounding nations, (the seven devoted nations 
excepted,) and purchase men-servants and wo- 
men-servants, and give them, and their increase, 
to their children and their children's children, 
forever ; and worse still for the refined humanity 
of our age — he guarantees to the foreign slave- 
holder perfect protection, while he comes in 
among the Israelites, for the purpose of dwelling, 



28 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

and raising and selling slaves, who should bo 
acclimated and accustomed to the habits and 
institutions of the country. And worse still for 
the sublimated humanity of the present age, Grod 
passes with the right to buy and possess, the 
right to govern, by a severity which knows no 
bounds but the master's discretion. And if 
worse can be, for the morbid humanity we cen- 
sure, he enacts that his own people may sell 
themselves and their families for limited periods, 
witb the privilege of extending the time at the 
end of the sixth year to the fiftieth year or 
jubilee, if they prefer bondage to freedom. Such 
is the precise character of two institutions, found 
in the constitution of the Jewish commonwealth, 
emanating directly from Almighty God. For 
the fifteen hundred years, during which these 
laws were in force, God raised up a succession of 
prophets to reprove that people for tho various 
sins into which they fell ; yet there is not a re- 
proof uttered against the institution of involun- 
tary slavery, for any species of abuse that ever 
grew out of it. A severe judgment is pronounced 
by Jeremiah, (chapter xxxiv: see from the 8th to 
the 22d verse,) for an abuse or violation of the 
law, concerning the voluntary servitude of He- 
brews; but the prophet pens it with caution, as 
if to show that it had no reference to any abuse 
that had taken place under the system of in- 
voluntary slavery, which existed by law among 
that people; the sin consisted in making heredi- 
tary bond-men and bond-women of Hebrews, 



OF SLAVERY*. 29 

which was positively forbidden by the law, and 

not for buying and holding one of another 
nation in hereditary bondage, which was as 
positively allowed by the law. And really, in 
view of what is passing in our country, and else- 
where, among men who profess to reverence the 
Bible, it would seem that these must be dreams 
of a distempered brain, and not the solemn truths 
of that sacred book. 

Well, I will now proceed to make them good 
to the letter, see Lev. xxv: 44, 45, 4G ; "Thy 
bond-men and thy bond-maids which thou shalt 
have, shall be of the heathen that are round 
about you* of them shall ye buy bond-men and 
bond-maids. Moreover, of the children of the 
strangers that do sojourn among you, of them 
shall ye buy, and of their families that are with 
you, which they begat in your land. And they 
shall be your possession. And ye shall take 
them as an inheritance for your children after 
you, to inherit them for a possession, they shall 
be your bond-men forever." I ask any candid 
man, if the words of this institution could be 
more explicit? It is from God himself; it 
authorizes that people, to whom he had become 
king and law-giver, to purchase men and women 
as property; to hold them and their posterity in 
bondage; and to will them to their children as a 
possession forever ; and more, it allows foreign 
slaveholders to settle and live among them; to breed 
slaves and sell them. Now, it is important to a 
correct understanding of this subject, to connect 
b3 



30 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

with the right to buy and yiossess, as property, the 
amount of authority to govern, which is granted 
hy the law-giver ; this amount of authority is 
implied, in the first place, in the law which 
prohibits the exercise of rigid authority upon 
the Hebrews,, who are allowed to sell themselves 
for limited times. "If thy brother bo waxen poor, 
and be sold unto thee, thou shalt not compel him 
to serve as a bond servant, but as a hired servant, 
and as a sojourner he shall be with thee, and shall 
serve thee until the year of jubilee — they shall not 
be sold as bond-men; thou shalt not ride over them 
with rigor."-— Levit. xxv: 39, 40, 41, 42, 43. It 
will be evident to all, that here are two states of 
servitude; in reference to one of which, rigid or 
compidsory authority, is prohibited, and that its 
exercise is authorized in the other. 

Second. In the criminal code, that conduct is 
punished with death, when done to a freeman, 
which is not punishable at all, when done by a 
master to a slave, for the express reason, that the 
slave is the masters money. " He that smiteth a 
man so that he die, shall surely be put to death." 
Exod. xxi : 11, 12. "If a man smite his servant 
or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his 
hand, he shall be surely punished ; notwithstand- 
ing, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be 
punished, for he is his money." — Exod. xxi: 20. 
Here is precisely the same crime : smiting a man 
so that he die ; if it be a freeman, he shall surely 
be put to death, whether the man die under his 
liand, or live a day or two after ; but if it be a 



OF SLAVERY. HI 

servant, and the master continued the rod until 
the servant died under his hand, then it must be 
evident that such a chastisement could not bo 
necessary for any purpose of wholesome or reason- 
able authority, and therefore he may be punished, 
but not with death. But if the death did not 
take place for a day or two, then it is to be pre- 
sumed, that the master only aimed to use the rod, 
so far as was necessary to produce subordination, 
and for this, the law which allowed him to lay 
out his money in the slave, would protect him 
against all punishment. This is the common- 
sense principle which has been adopted substan- 
tially in civilized countries, where involuntary 
slavery has been instituted, from that day until 
this. Now, here are laws that authorize the 
holding of men and women in bondage, and 
chastising them with the rod, with a sewsrity that 
terminates in death. And he who believes the 
Bible to be of divine authority, believes these 
laws were given by the Holy Ghost to Moses. I 
understand modern abolition sentiments to bo 
sentiments of marked hatred against such laws ; 
to be sentiments which would hold God himself 
in abhorrence, if he were to give such laws his 
sanction ; but he has given them his sanction ; 
therefore, they must be in harmony with his 
moral character. Again, the divine Lawgiver, in 
guarding the property right in slaves among his 
chosen people, sanctions principles which may 
work the separation of man and wife, father and 

children. Surely, my reader will conclude, if I 
b4 



32 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

make this good, I shall force a part of the saints 
of the present day to blaspheme the God of Israel. 
All I can say is, truth is mighty, and I hope it 
will bring us all to say, let God be true, in 
settling the true principles of humanity, and 
every man a liar who says slavery was inconsis- 
tent with it, in the days of the Mosaic law. Now 
for the proof : " If thou buy a Hebrew servant, 
six years shall he serve thee, and in the seventh 
he shall go out free for nothing ; if he came in 
by himself, he shall go out by himself; if he 
were married, 'then his wife shall go out with 
him ; if his master have given him a wife (one of 
his bond-maids) and she have borne him sous and 
daughters, the w T ife and her children shall be her 
master's and he shall go out by himself." — Exod. 
xxi: 2, 3, 4. Now, the God of Israel gives this 
man the option of being separated by the master, 
from his wife and children, or becoming himself 
a servant forever, with a mark of the fact, like 
our cattle, in the ear, that can be seen wherever 
he goes ; for it is enacted, " If the servant shall 
plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my 
children, I will not go out free, then his master 
shall bring him unto the judges, (in open court,) 
he shall also bring him unto the door, or unto the 
door post, (so that all in the court-house, and 
those in the yard may be witnesses, and his mas- 
ter shall bore his ear through with an awl; and 
he shall serve him forever." It is useless to 
spend more time in gathering up what is written 



OF SLAVERY. 33 

in the Scriptures on this subject, from the giving 
of the law until the coming of Christ. 

Here is the authority, from God himself, to 
hold men and women, and their increase, in 
slavery, and to transmit them as property forever; 
here is plenary power to govern them, whatever 
measure of severity it may require ; provided 
only, that to govern, be the object in exercising it. 
Here is power given to the master, to separate 
man and wife, parent and child, by denying 
ingress to his premises, sooner than compel him 
to free or sell the mother, that the marriage 
relation might be honored. The preference is 
given of God to enslaving the father rather than 
freeing the mother and children. 

Under every view we are allowed to take of the 
subject, the conviction is forced upon the mind, 
that from Abraham's day, until the coming of 
Christ, (a period of two thousand years,) this 
institution found favor with God. No marks of 
his displeasure are found resting upon it. It ■ 
must, therefore, in its moral nature, be in har- 
mony with those moral principles which he 
requires to be exercised by the law of Moses, and 
which are the principles that secure harmony and 
happiness to the universe, viz : supreme love to 
God, and the love of our neighbor as ourself. — 
Dent, vi : G. — Levit. xix : 18. To suppose that 
God has laid down these fundamental principles 
of moral rectitude in his law, as the soul that 
must inhabit every preceptive requirement of that 

law, and vet to suppose he created relations 
b5 



34 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

among the Israelites, and prescribed relative 
duties growing out of these relations, that are 
hostile to the spirit of the law, is to suppose what 
will never bring great honor or glory to our 
Maker. But if I understand that spirit which is 
now warring against slavery, this is the position 
which the spirit of God forces it to occupy, viz : 
that God has ordained slavery, and yet slavery is 
the greatest of sins. Such was the state of the 
case when Jesus Christ made his appearance. 
We propose — 

Third. To show that Jesus Christ recognized 
this institution as one that w r as lawful among 
men, and regulated its relative duties. 

Having shown from the Scriptures, that slavery 
existed with Abraham and the patriarchs, with 
divine approbation, and having shown from the 
same source, that the Almighty incorporated it in 
the law, as an institution among Abraham's seed, 
until the coming of Christ, our precise object now 
is, to ascertain whether Jesus Christ has abolished 
it, or recognized it as a lawful relation, existing 
among men, and prescribed duties which belong 
to it, as he has other relative duties ; such as 
those between husband and wife, parent and child, 
magistrate and subject. 

And first, I may take it for granted, without 
proof, that he has not abolished it by command- 
ment, for none pretend to this. This, by the 
way, is a singular circumstance, that Jesus Christ 
should put a system of measures into operation, 



OF SLAVERY. 35 

which have for then- object the subjugation of all 
men to him as a law-giver— kings, legislators, 
and private citizens in all nations ; at a time, too, 
-when hereditary slavery existedjn all; and after 
it had been incorporated for fifteen hundred years 
into the Jewish constitution, immediately given 
by God himself. I say, it is passing strange, that 
under such circumstances, Jesus should fail to 
prohibit its further existence, if it was his inten- 
tion to abolish it. Such an omission or oversight 
cannot be charged upon any other legislator the 
world has ever seen. But, says the Abolitionist, 
he has introduced new moral principles, which 
will extinguish it as an unavoidable consequence, 
without a direct prohibitory command. What 
are they ? " Do to others as you would they 
should do to you." Taking these words of 
Christ to be a body, inclosing a moral soul in 
them, what soul, I ask, is it? 

The same embodied in these words of Moses, 
Levit. xix: 18; "thou shalt love thy neighbor as 
thyself ;" or is it another ? It cannot be another, 
but it must be the very same, because Jesus says, 
there are but two principles in being in God's 
moral government., one. including all that is dice 
to God, the other all that is due to men. 

If, therefore, doing to others as we would they 

should do to us, means precisely what loving our 

neighbor as ourself means, then Jesus has added 

no new moral principle above those in the law of 

Moses, to prohibit slavery, for in his law is found 

this principle, and slavery also. 
b6 



ob SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

The very God that said to them, they should 
love him supremely, and their neighbors as them- 
selves, said to them also, "of the heathen that 
are round about you, thou shalt buy bond-men 
and bond-women, and they shall be your posses- 
sion,, and ye shall take them as an inheritance for 
your children after you, to inherit them as a pos- 
session ; they shall be your bond-men forever." 
Now, to suppose that Jesus Christ left his 
disciples to find out, without a revelation, that 
slavery must be abolished, as a natural conse- 
quence from the fact, that when God established 
the relation of master and servant under the law, 
he said to the master and servant, each of you 
must love the other as yourself, is, to say the 
least, making Jesus to presume largely, upon the 
intensity of their intellect, that they would be 
able to spy out a discrepancy in the law of Moses, 
which God himself never saw. Again: if "do 
to others as ye would they should do to you," is 
to abolish slavery, it will for the same reason, 
level all inequalities in human condition. It is 
not to be admitted, then, that Jesus Christ 
introduced any new moral principle that must, 
of necessity, abolish slavery. The principle re- 
lied on to prove it, stands boldly out to view in 
the code of Moses, as the soul, that must regulate, 
and control, the relation of master and servant, 
and therefore cannot abolish it. 

Why a master cannot do to a servant, or a ser- 
vant to a master, as he would have them do to 
him, as soon as a wife to a husband or a husband 



OF SLAVERY. o7 

to a wife, I am utterly at a loss to know. The 
wife is "subject to her husband in all things" by 
divine precept. He is her "head," and God 
"suffers her not to usurp authority over him." 
Now, why in such a relation as this, we can do to 
others as we would they should do to us, any 
sooner than in a relation, securing to us what is 
just and equal as servants, and due respect and 
faithful service rendered with good will to us as 
masters, I am at a loss to conceive. I affirm 
then, first, (and no man denies,) that Jesus 
Christ has not abolished slavery by a prohibitory 
command : and second, I affirm, he has intro- 
duced no new moral prinriple which can work its 
destruction, under the gospel dispensation; and 
that the principle relied on for this purpose, is a 
fundamental principle of the Mosaic law, under 
which slavery was instituted by Jehovah himself: 
and third, with this absence of positive prohibi- 
tion, and this absence of principle, to work its 
ruin, I affirm, that in all the Koman provinces, 
where churches were planted by the Apostles, 
hereditary slaveiy existed, as it did among the 
Jews, and as it does now among us, (which 
admits of proof from history that no man will 
dispute who knows anything of the matter,) and 
that in instructing such churches, the Holy Ghost 
by the Apostles, has recognized the institution, as 
one legally existing among them, to be perpetuated 
in the church, and that its duties are prescribed. 
Now for the proof :. To the church planted at 
Ephesus, the capital of the lesser Asia, Paul 



38 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

ordains by letter, subordination in the fear of 
God, — first between "wife and husband; second, 
child and parent ; third, servant and master ; 
all, as states, or conditions, existing among the 
members. 

The relative duties of each state, are pointed 
out ; those between the servant and master in 
these words : "Servants be obedient to them who 
are your masters, according to the flesh, with fear 
and trembling, in singleness of your heart as 
unto Christ; not with eye service as men pleas- 
erSj but as the servants of Christ, doing the will 
of God from the heart, with good will, doing 
service, as to the Lord and not to men, knowing 
that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the 
same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be 
bond or free. And ye masters do the same things 
to them., forbearing threatening, knowing that 
your master is also in heaven, neither is there 
respect of persons with him." Here, by the Eo- 
mau law, the servant was property, and the con- 
trol of the master unlimited, as we shall presently 
prove. 

To the church at Colosse, a city of Phrygia, in 
the lesser Asia, — Paul in his letter to them, 
recognizes the three relations of wives and hus- 
bands, parents and children, servants and mas- 
ters, as relations existing among the members; 
(here the Roman law was the same ;) and to the 
servants and masters he thus writes : " Servants 
obey in all things your masters, according to 
the flesh: not with eye service,, as men pleasers, 



OF SLAVERY. 39 

but in singleness of heart, fearing God : and 
whatsoever you do, do it heartily, as to the Lord 
and not unto men ; knowing that of the Lord yo 
shall receive the reward of the inheritance, for ye 
serve the Lord Christ. But he that doeth wrong 
shall receive for the wrong he has done ; and 
there is no respect of persons with God. Masters 
give unto your servants that which is just and 
equal, knowing that you also have a master in 
heaven." 

The same Apostle writes a letter to the church 
at Corinth ; — a very important city, formerly 
called the eye of Greece, either from its location, 
or intelligence, or both, and consequently, an 
important point, for radiating light in all direc- 
tions^ in reference to subjects connected with the 
cause of Jesus Christ ; and particularly, in the 
bearing of its practical precepts on civil society, 
and the political structure of nations. Under 
the direction of the Holy Ghost, he instructs the 
church, that, on this particular subject, one 
general principle was ordained of God, applicable 
alike in all countries and at all stages of the 
church's future history, and that it was this: "as 
the Lord has called every one, so let him walk." 
"Let every man abide in the same calling where- 
in he is called." "Let every man wherein he is 
called, therein abide with God." — 1 Cor. vii: 17, 
20, 24. "And so ordain I in all churches;" vii: 
17. The Apostle thus explains his meaning : 

"Is any man called being circumcised? Let 
him not become uncircumcised." 



40 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

"Is any man called iji uncircuracision? Let 
him not be circumcised." 

"Art thou called, being a servant? Care not 
for it, but if thou mayst be made free, use it 
rather;" vii: 18, 21. Here, by the Roman law, 
slaves were property, — yet Paul ordains, in this 
and all other churches, that Christianity gave 
them no title to freedom, but on the contrary, 
required them not to care for being slaves, or in 
other words, to be contented with their state, or 
relation, unless they could be made free, in a law- 
ful way. 

Again, we have a letter by Peter, who is the 
Apostle of the circumcision — addressed especially 
to the Jews, who were scattered through various 
provinces of the Roman empire; comprising those 
provinces especially, which were the theatre of 
their dispersion, under the Assyrians and Baby- 
lonians. Here, for the space of seven hundred 
and fifty years, they had resided, during which 
time those revolutions were in progress which 
terminated the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, and 
Macedonian empires, and transferred imperial 
power to Rome. These revolutionary scenes of 
violence left one half the human race (within the 
range of their influence,) in abject bondage to 
the other half. This was the state of things in 
these provinces addressed by Peter, when he 
wrote. The chances of war, we may reasonably 
conclude, had assigned a full share of bondage to 
this people, who were despised of all nations. 
In view of their enslaved condition to the Gen- 



OF SLAVERY. 41 

tiles ; knowing, as Peter did, their seditious 
character; foreseeing, from the prediction of the 
Saviour, the destined bondage of those who were 
then free in Israel, which was soon to take place, 
as it did. in the fall of Jerusalem, when all the 
males of seventeen, were sent to work in the 
mines of Egypt, as slaves to the State, and all 
the males under, amounting to upwards of 
ninety-seven thousand, were sold into domestic 
bondage ; — I say, in view of these things, Peter 
was moved by the Holy Ghost to write to them, 
and his solicitude for such of them as were in 
slavery, is very conspicuous in his letter; (read 
carefully from 1st Peter, 2d chapter, from the 
13th verse to the end;) but it is not the solicitude 
of an abolitionist. He thus addresses them : 
"Dearly beloved, I beseech you." He thus in- 
structs them: "Submit yourselves to every ordi- 
nance of man for the Lord's sake." "For so is 
the will of God." "Servants, be subject to your 
masters with all fear, not only to the good and 
gentle, but also to the froward." — 1st Peter ii: 
11, 13, 15, 18. What an important document is 
this! enjoining political subjection to governments 
of every form, and Christian subjection on the 
part of servants to their masters, whether good 
or bad; for the purpose of showing forth to ad- 
vantage, the glory of the gospel, and putting to 
silence the ignorance of foolish men, who might 
think it seditious. 

By "every ordinance of man," as the context 
will show, is meant governmental regulations or 



42 SCItlPTUllAL VIEW 

laws, as was that of the Romans for enslaving 
their prisoners taken in war, instead of destroying 
their lives. 

When such enslaved persons came into the 
church of Christ let them (says Peter) "be subject 
to their masters with all fear/' whether such 
masters be good or bad. It is worthy of remark, 
that he says much to secure civil subordination to 
the State, and hearty and cheerful obedience to 
the masters, on the part of servants; yet he says 
nothing to masters in the whole letter. It would 
seem from this, that danger to the cause of Christ 
was on the side of insubordination among the 
servants, and a ivant of humility with inferiors, 
rather than haughtiness among superiors in the 
church. 

Gibbon, in his Rome, vol. 1, pages 25, 26, 27, 
shows, from standard authorities, that Rome at 
this time swayed its sceptre over one hundred 
and twenty millions of souls; that, in every 
province, and in every family, absolute slaver// 
existed; that it was at least fifty years later than 
the date of Peter's letters, before the absolute 
power of life and death over the slave was taken 
from the master, and committed to the magistrate; 
that about sixty millions of souls were held as 
property in this abject condition; that the price 
of a slave was four times that of an ox; that 
their punishments were very sanguinary; that in 
the second century, when their condition began 
to improve a little, emancipation was prohibited, 
except for great personal merit, or some public 



OF SLAVERY. 43 

service rendered to the State; and that it was not 
until the third or fourth generation after freedom 
was obtained, that the descendants of a slave 
could share in the honors of the State. This is 
the state, condition, or relation among the members 
of the apostolic churches, whether among Gentiles 
or Jews; which the Holy Ghost, by Paul for the 
Gentiles, and Peter for the Jews, recognizes as 
lawful ; the mutual duties of which he prescribes 
in the language above. Now, I ask, can any 
man in his proper senses, from these premises, 
bring himself to conclude that slavery is abolished 
by Jesus Christ, or that obligations are imposed 
by him upon his disciples that are subversive of 
the institution? Knowing as we do from cotem- 
porary historians, that the institution of slavery 
existed at the time and to the extent stated by 
Gibbon — what sort of a soul a man must have, 
who, with these facts before him, will conceal the 
truth on this subject, and hold Jesus Christ re- 
sponsible for a scheme of treason that would, if 
carried out, have brought the life of every human 
being on earth at the time, into the most immi- 
nent peril, and that must have worked the de- 
struction of half the human race? 

At Eome, the authoritative centre of that vast 
theatre upon which the glories of the cross were 
to be won, a church was planted. Paul wrote a 
long letter to them. On this subject it is full of 
instruction. 

Abolition sentiments had not dared to show 
themselves so near the imperial sword. To warn 



4-1 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

the church against their treasonable tendency, 
was therefore unnecessary. Instead, therefore, of 
special precepts upon the subject of relative duties 
between master and servant, he lays down a system 
of practical morality, in the 12th chapter of his 
letter, which must commend itself equally to the 
king on his throne, and the slave in his hovel ; 
for while its practical operation leaves the subject 
of earthly government to the discretion of man, 
it secures the exercise of sentiments and feelings 
that must exterminate everything inconsistent 
with doing to others as we would they should do 
unto us: a system of principles that will give 
moral strength to governments ; peace, security, 
and good will to individuals; and glory to Clod 
in the highest. And in the 13th chapter, from 
the 1st to the end of the 7th verse, Ire recognizes 
human government as an ordinance of God, 
which the followers of Christ are to obey, honor, 
and support; not only from dread of punishment, 
but/or conscience sake; which I believe abolition- 
ism refuses most positively to do, to such govern- 
ments as from the force of circumstances even 
permit slavery. 

Again. But we are furnished with additional 
light, and if we are not greatly mistaken, with 
light which arose out of circumstances analogous 
to those which are threatening at the present 
moment to overthrow the peace of society, and 
deluge this nation with blood. To Titus whom 
Paul left in Crete, to set in order the things that 
were wanting, he writes a letter, in which he 



OF SLAVERY. 45 

warns liim of false teachers, that were to ho 
dreaded on account of their doctrine. While 
they professed "to know God," that is, to know 
his will under the gospel dispensation, "in works 
they denied him;" that is, they did, and required 
others to do, what was contrary to his will under 
the gospel dispensation. "They were abomina- 
ble," that is, to the church and state, "and diso- 
bedient," that is to the authority of the Apostles, 
and the civil authority of the land. Titus, he 
then exhorts, "to speak the things that become 
sound doctrine;" that is, that the members of 
the church observe the law of the land, and obey 
the civil magistrate; that "servants be obedient 
to their own masters, and please them well in all 
things," not "answering again, not purloining, 
but showing all good fidelity that they may 
adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all 
things," in that which subjects the ecclesiastical to 
the civil authority in particular. "These things 
speak, and exhort and rebuke with all authority; 
let no man despise thee. Put them in mind to be 
subject to principalities and powers, to obey mag- 
istrates." — Titus i: 1G, and ii: from 1 to 10, and 
iii: 1. The context shows that a doctrine was 
taught by these wicked men, which tended in its 
influence on servants, to bring the gospel of 
Christ into comtempt, in church and state, 
because of its seditions and insubordinate char- 
acter. 

But at Ephesus, the capital of the lesser Asia, 
where Paul had labored with great success for 



46 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

three years — a point of great importance to the 
gospel cause — the Apostle left Timothy for the 
purpose of watching against the false teachers., 
and particularly against the abolitionists. In 
addition to a letter which he had addressed to 
this church previously, in which the mutual duty 
of master and servant is taught, and which has 
already been referred to, he further instructs 
Timothy by letter on the same subject: "Let as 
many servants as are under the yoke count their 
masters worthy of all honor, that the name of 
Ood and his doctrine be not blasphemed."— 1 
Tim. vi: 1. These were unbelieving masters, as 
the next verse will show. In this church at 
Ephesus, the circumstances existed, which are 
brought to light by Paul's letter to Timothy, that 
must silence every cavil, which men, who do not 
know God's will on this subject, may start until 
time ends. In an age rilled with literary men, 
who are emploj^ed in transmitting historically, to 
future generations, the structure of society in the 
Xloman Empire; that would put it in our power 
at this distant day, to know the state or condition 
of a slave in the Roman Empire, as well as if we 
had lived at the time, and to know beyond ques- 
tion, that his condition was precisely that one, 
which is now denounced as sinful: in such an 
age, and in such circumstances, Jesus Christ 
causes his will to be published to the world ; and 
it is this, that if a Christian slave have an unbe- 
lieving master, who acknowledges no allegiance 
to Christ, this believing slave must count his 



(IF M.AVKM'. 47 

master worthy of all honor, according to what 
the Apostle teaches the Romans, "Render, there- 
fore, to all their dues, tribute to whom tribute is 
due, custom to whom custom is due, fear to whom 
fear, honor to whom honor." — Rom. xiii: 7. 
Now, honor is enjoined of God in the Scriptures, 
from children to parents — from husbands to 
wives — from subjects to magistrates and rulers, 
and here by Jesus Christ, from Christian slaves 
to unbelieving masters, who held them as prop- 
erty by law, with power over their very lives. 
And the command is remarkable. While we are 
commanded to honor father and mother, without 
adding to the precept "all honor," here a Chris- 
tian servant is bound to render to his unbelieving 
master "all honor." Why is this? Because in 
the one case nature moves in the direction of the 
command ; but in the other, against it. Nature 
being subjected to the law of grace, might be dis- 
posed to obey reluctantly; hence the amplitude of 
the command. But what purpose was to be 
answered by this devotion of the slave? The 
Apostle answers, "that the name of God and 
his doctrine (of subordination to the law-making 
power) be not blasphemed," as they certainly 
would by a contrary course on the part of the 
servant, for the most obvious reason in the world; 
-while the sword would have been drawn against 
the gospel, and a war of extermination waged 
against its propagators, in every province of the 
Roman Empire, for there was slavery in all ; and 
so it would be now. 



48 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

But, says the caviler, these directions are given 
to Christian slaves whose masters did not ac- 
knowledge the authority of Christ to govern 
them'; and are therefore defective as proof, that 
he approves of one Christian man holding another 
in bondage. Very well, we will see. In the next 
verse, (1 Timothy vi: 2,) he says, "and they that 
have believing masters, .let them not despise 
them, because they are brethren, but rather do 
them service, because they are faithful and be- 
loved, partakers of the benefit." Here is a great 
change; instead of a command to a believing 
slave to render to a believing master all honor, 
and thereby making that believing master in honor 
equal to an unbelieving master, here is rather an 
exhortation to the slave not to despise him, because 
he is a believer. Now, I ask, why the circum- 
stance of a master becoming a believer in Christ, 
should become the cause of his believing slave 
despising him while that slave was supposed to 
acquiesce in the duty of rendering all honor to 
that master before he became a believer? I 
answer, precisely, and only, because there were 
abolition teachers among them, who taught other- 
ivise, and consented not to wholesome words, even 
the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. — 1 Timothy 
vii: 3: and "to the doctrine which is according 
to godliness," taught in the 8th verse, viz: having 
food and raiment, servants should therewith be 
content; for the pronoun us, in the 8th verse of 
this connection, means especially the servants he 
was instructing, as well as Christians in general. 



OF SLAVERY. 49 . 

These men taught, that godliness abolished sla- 
very, that it gave the title of freedom to the 
slave, and that so soon as a man professed to be 
subject to Christ, and refused to • liberate his 
slaves, he was a hypocrite, and deserved not the 
countenance of any who bore the Christian name. 
Such men, the Apostle says, are "proud, (just as 
they are now,) knowing nothing," (that is, on 
this subject,) but "doating about questions, and 
strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, 
railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of 
men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, 
supposing that gain is godliness: from such with- 
draw thyself." — 1 Tim. vi: 4, 5. 
, Such were the bitter fruits which abolition 
sentiments produced in the Apostolic day, and 
such precisely are the fruits they produce now. 

Now, I say, here is the case made out, which 
certainly would call forth the command from 
Christ, to abolish slavery, if he ever intended to 
abolish it. Both the servant and the master were 
one in Christ Jesus. Both were members of the 
same church, both were under unlimited and 
voluntary obedience to the same divine law- 
giver. 

No political objection existed at the time against 
their obedience to him on the subject of slavery ; 
and what is the will, not of Paul, but of the 
Lord Jesus Christ, immediately in persom, upon 
the case thus made out? Does he say to the mas- 
ter, having put yourself under my government, 
you must no longer hold your brother in bon- 



50 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

dage ? Does lie say to the slave, if your master 
does not release you, you must go and talk to 
him privately, about this trespass upon your 
rights under- the law of my kingdom ; and if he 
does not hear you, you must take two or three 
with you; and if he does not hear them then you 
must tell it to the church, and have him expelled 
from my flock, as a wolf in sheep's clothing? I 
say, what does the Lord Jesus say to this poor 
believing slave, concerning a master who held 
unlimited power over his person and life, under 
the Koman law? He tells him that the very 
circumstance of his master's being a brother, 
constitutes the reason why he should be more 
ready to do him service; for in addition to the 
circumstance of his being a brother who would 
be benefited by his service, he would as a brother 
give him what was just and equal in return, and 
"forbear threatening," much less abusing his 
authority over him, for that he (the master) also 
had a master in heaven, who was no respecter of 
persons. It is taken for granted, on all hands 
pretty generally, that Jesus Christ has at least 
been silent, or that he has not personally spoken 
on the subject of slavery. Once for all, I deny it. 
Paul, after stating that a slave was to honor an 
unbelieving master, in the 1st verse of the 6th 
chapter, says, in the 2d verse, that to a believing 
master, he is the rather to do service, because he 
who partakes of the benefit is his brother. He 
then says, if any man teach otherwise, (as all 
abolitionists then did, and now do,) and consent 



OF SLAVERY. 51 

not to wholesome words, "even the words of our 
Lord Jesus Christ." Now, if our Lord Jesus 
Christ uttered such words, how dare wo say he 
has been silent? If he has been silent, how dare 
the Apostle say these are the words of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, if the Lord Jesus Christ never 
spoke them? Where, or when, or on what occa- 
sion he spoke them, we are not informed ; but 
certain it is, that Paul has borne false witness, or 
that Jesus Christ has uttered the words that im- 
pose an obligation on servants, who, are abject 
slaves, to render service with good will from the 
heart, to believing masters, and to account their 
unbelieving masters as worthy of all honor, thaj 
the name of God and his doetrine be not blas- 
phemed. Jesus Christ revealed to Paul the 
doctrine which Paul has settled throughout the 
Gentile world, (and by consequence, the Jewish 
world also,) on the subject of slavery, so far as it ■ 
affects his kingdom. As we have seen, it is clear 
and full. 

From the great importance of the subject, 
involving the personal liberty of half the human 
race at that time, and a large portion of them at 
all times since, it is not to be wondered at, that 
Paul would carry the question to the Saviour, and 
plead for a decisive expression of his will, that 
would forever do away the necessity of inferring 
anything by reasoning from the premises laid 
down in the former dispensation; or in the patri- 
archal age; and at Ephesus, if not at Crete, the 

issue is fairly made, between' Paul on the one 
c2 



52 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

side, and certain abolition teachers on the other, 
when, in addition to the official intelligence 
ordinarily given to the Apostles by the Holy 
Ghost, to guide them into all truth, he affirms, 
that the doctrine of perfect civil subordination, on 
the part of hereditary slaves to their masters, 
•whether believers or unbelievers, was one which 
he, Paul, taught in the words of the Lord Jesus 
Christ himself. 

The Scriptures we have adduced from the New 
Testament, to prove the recognition of hereditary 
slavery by the Saviour, as a lawful relation in the 
sight of God, lose much of their force from the 
•use of a word by the translators, which by time, 
has lost much of its original meaning; that if, 
the word servant. Dr. Johnson, in his Diction- 
ary, says: "Servant is one of the few words, 
which by time has acquired a softer signification 
than its original; knave, degenerated into cheat. 
While servant, which signified originally, a per- 
son preserved from death by the conqueror, and 
reserved for slavery, signifies only an obedient 
attendant." Now, all history will prove that the 
servants of the New Testament addressed by the 
Apostles, in their letters to the several churches 
throughout the Roman Empire, were such as were 
preserved from death by the conqueror, and taken 
into slavery. This was their condition, and it is a 
fact well known to all men acquainted with his- 
tory. Had the word which designates their con- 
dition, in our translation, lost none of its original 
moaning, a common man could not have fallen 



into a mistake as to tlic condition indicated. 
But to waive tin's fact we are furnished with all the 
evidence that can he desired. The Saviour ap- 
peared in an age of learning — the enslaved con- 
dition of half the Roman Empire, at the time, is 
a fact embodied with all the historical records — 
the constitution God gave the Jews, was in 
harmony with the Roman regulations on the 
subject of slavery. In this state of things, Jesus 
ordered his gospel to he preached in all the 
world, and to every creature. It Avas done as he 
directed; and masters and servants, and persons 
in all conditions, were Drought by the gospel to 
obey the Saviour. Churches were constituted.. 
We have examined the letters written to the 
churches, composed of these materials. The re- 
sult is, that each member is furnished with a law 
to regulate the duties of his civil station — from 
the highest to the lowest. 

We will remark, in closing under this head, 
that we have shown from the text of the sacred 
volume, that when God entered into covenant 
with Abraham, it was with him as a slaveholder; 
that when he took his posterity by the hand in 
Egypt, five hundred years afterwards to confirm 
the promise made to Abraham, it was done with 
them as slaveholders; that when he gave them a 
constitution of government, he gave them the 
right to perpetuate hereditary slavery ; and that 
be did not for the fifteen hundred years of their 
national existence, express disapprobation towards 
thu institution. 
c3 



54- SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

We have also shown from authentic history 
that the institution of slavery existed in every 
family, and in eveiy province of the Roman. 
Empire, at the time the gospel was published to 
them. 

We have also shown from the New Testament, 
that all the churches are recognized as composed 
of masters and servants; and that they are in- 
structed by Christ how to discharge their relative 
duties; and finally that in reference to the ques- 
tion which was then started, whether Christianity 
did not abolish the institution, or the right of one 
Christian to hold another Christian in bondage, 
we have shown, that "the words of our Lord 
Jesus Christ" are, that so far from this being 
the case, it adds to the obligation of the servant 
to render service with good will to his master, and 
that gospel fellowship is not to be entertained 
Avith persons who will not consent to it! 

I propose, in the fourth place, to show that the 
institution of slavery is fall of mercy. I shall 
say but a few words on this subject. Authentic 
history warrants this conclusion, that for a long 
period of time, it was this institution alone which 
furnished a motive for sparing the prisoner's 
life. The chances of war, when the earth was 
filled with small tribes of men, who had a pas- 
sion for it, brought to decision, almost daily, 
conflicts, where nothing but this institution in- 
terposed an inducement to save the vanquished. 
The same was true in the enlarged schemes of 
conquest, which brought the four great universal 



OF SLAVERY. 55 

empires of tlio Scriptures to tho zenith of their 
power. 

The same is true in the history of Africa, as far 
hack as we can trace it. It is only soher truth to 
say, that the institution of slavery has saved from 
the sword more lives, including their increase, 
than all the souls who now inhabit this globe. 

The souls thus conquered' and subjected to mas- 
ters, who feared not God nor regarded men, in 
the days of Abraham, Job, and the Patriarchs, 
were surely brought under great obligations to 
the mercy of God, in allowing such men as 
these to purchase them, and keep them in their 
families. 

The institution when ingrafted Qn the Jewish 
constitution, was designed principally, not to 
enlarge the number, but to ameliorate the condi- 
tion of the slaves in the neighboring nations. 

Under the gospel, it has brought within the 

range of gospel influence, millions of Ham's 

descendants among ourselves, who but for this 

institution, would have sunk down to eternal 

ruin ; knowing not God, and strangers to tho 

gospel. In their bondage here on earth, they 

have been much better provided for, and great 

multitudes of them have been made the freemen 

of the Lord Jesus Christ, and left this world 

rejoicing in hope of the glory of God. The 

elements of an empire, which I hope will lead 

Ethiopia very soon to stretch out her hands to 

God, is the fruit of the institution here. An 

officious meddling with the institution, from 
c4 



56 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

feeling and sentiments unknown to the Bible, 
may lead to the extermination of the slave race 
among us, who, taken as a whole, are utterly- 
unprepared for a higher civil state; but benefit 
them, it cannot. Their condition, as a class, is 
now bettter than that of any other equal num- 
ber of laborers on earth, and is daily improving. 
If the Bible is allowed to awaken the spirit, 
and control the philanthropy which works their 
good, the day is not far distant when the highest 
wishes of saints will be gratified, in having con- 
ferred on them all that the spirit of good-will can 
bestow. This spirit which was kindling into life, 
has received a great check among us of late, by 
that trait which the Apostle Peter reproves and 
shames in his officious countrymen, when he says: 
"But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as 
a thief, or as an evil doer, or as a busy-body in 
other men's matters." Our citizens have been 
murdered — our property has been stolen, (if the 
receiver is as bad as the thief,) — our lives have 
been put in jeopardy — our characters traduced— 
and attempts made to force political slavery upon 
us in the place of domestic, by strangers who 
have no right to meddle with our matters. In- 
stead of meditating generous things to our slaves, 
as a return for gospel subordination, we have to 
put on our armor to suppress a rebellious spirit, 
engendered by "false doctrine," propagated by 
men "of corrupt minds, and destitute of the 
truth," who teach them that the gain of freedom 
to the slave, is the only proof of godliness in the 



OF SLAVERY. 57 

master. From such, Faul says we must withdraw 
ourselves; and if we fail to do it, and to rebuke 
them with all the authority which "the words of 
our Lord Jesus Christ" confer, we shall be want- 
ing in duty to them, to ourselves, and to the 
world. 

THORNTON STRINGFELLOW. 



c5 



58 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 



AN EXAMINATION 

OF ELDER GALUSHA'S REPLY TO DR. RICHARD FULLER, 
OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 



After my essay on slavery was published in 
the Herald,* I sent a copy of it to a prominent 
Abolition gentleman in New York, accompanied 
by a friendly letter. 

This gentleman I selected as a correspondent, 
because of his high standing, intellectual attain- 
ments, and unquestioned piety. I frankly avowed 
to him my readiness to abandon slavery, so soon 
as I was convinced by the Bible that it was sin- 
ful, and requested him, " if the Bible contained 
precepts, and settled principles of conduct, in 
direct opposition to those portions of it upon 
which I relied, as furnishing the mind of the 
Almighty upon the subject of slavery, that he 
would furnish me with the knowledge of the 
fact." To this letter I received a friendly reply, 
accompanied by a printed communication con- 
taining the result of a prayerful effort which he 
had previously made, for the purpose of furnish- 

* These letters were first published in the Religious Herald, Richmond. 



OF SLAVERY. 59 

ing the very information to a friend at tlie South, 
which I sought to obtain at his hands. 

It may he owing to my prejudices, or a want 
of intellect, that I fail to be convinced, by those 
portions of the Bible to which he refers, to prove 
that slavery is sinful. But as the support of 
truth is my object, and as I wish to have the 
answer of a good conscience towards God in this 
matter, I herewith publish, for the information of 
all into whose hands my first essay may have 
fallen, every passage in the Bible to which this 
distinguished brother refers me for 'precepts and 
settled principles of conduct, in direct opposition 
to those portions of it upon which I relied, as 
furnishing the mind of the Almight}^ upon the 
subject of slavery." 

1st. His reference to the sacred volume is this: 
""God hath made of one blood all nations of 
men." This is a Scripture truth which I believe; 
yet God decreed that Canaan should be a servant 
of servants to his brother — that is, an abject 
slave in his posterity. This God effected eight- 
hundred years afterwards, in the clays of Joshua, 
when the Gibeonites were subjected to perpetual 
bondage, and made hewers of wood and drawers 
of water. — Joshua ix: 23. 

Again, God ordained, as law-giver to Israel, 
that their captives taken in war s*hould be en- 
slaved. — Deut. xx : 10 to 15. 

Again, God enacted that the Israelites should 

buy slaves of the heathen nations around them, 

and will them and their increase as property to 
c6 



60 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

their children forever. — Lev. xxv: 44, 45, 46. 
All these nations were made of one blood. Yet 
God ordained that some should be "chattel" 
slaves to others, and gave his special aid to effect 
it. In view of this incontrovertible fact, how can 
I believe this passage disproves the lawfulness of 
slavery in the sight of God? How can any sane 
man believe it, who believes the Bible? 

2d. His second Scripture reference to disprove 
the lawfulness of slavery in the sight of God, is 
this: "God has said a man is. better than a sheep." 
This is a Scripture truth which I fully believe — 
and I have no doubt, if we could ascertain what 
the Israelites had to pay for those slaves they 
bought with their money according to God's law, 
in Levit. xxv: 44, that we should find they had 
to pay more for them than they paid for sheep, 
for the reason assigned by the Saviour ; that is, 
that a servant man is better than a sheep ; for 
when he is done ploughing, or feeding cattle, and 
comes in from the field, he will, at his master's 
bidding, prepare him his meal, and wait upon 
him till he eats it, while the master feels under 
no obligation even to thank him for it because he 
has done no more than his duty. — Luke xvii: 7, 
8, 9. This, and other important duties, which 
the people of God bought their slaves to perform 
for them, by the permission of their Maker, were 
duties which sheep could not perform. But I 
cannot see what there is in it to blot out from the 
Bible a relation which God created, in which he 
made one man to be a slave to another. 



OF SLAVERY. 61 

3d. His third Scripture reference to provo the 
unlawfulness of slavery in the sight of God, is 
this: "God commands children to obey their 
parents, and wives to obey their husbands." 
This, I believe to be the will of Christ to Chris- 
tian children and Christian wives — whether they 
are bond or free. But it is equally true that 
Christ ordains that Christianity shall not abolish 
slavery. — 1 Cor. vii: 17, 21, and that he com- 
mands servants to obey their masters and to 
count them worthy of all honor. — 1 Tim. vi: 1, 2. 
It is also true, that God allowed Jewish masters 
to use the rod to make them do it — and to use it 
with the severity requisite to accomplish the 
object. — Ex. .xxi: 20, 21. It* is equally true, that 
Jesus Christ ordains that a Christian servant 
shall receive for the wrong he hath done. — Col. 
iii: 25. My correspondent admits, without quali- 
fication, that if they are property, it is right. 
But the Bible says, they were property. — Levit. 
xxv : 44, 45, 46. 

The above reference, reader enjoins the duty of 
two relations, which God ordained, but does not 
abolish a third relation which God has ordained; 
as the Scripture will prove, to which I have re- 
ferred you, under the first reference made by my 
correspondent. 

4th. His fourth Scripture reference is, to the 
intention of Abraham to give his estate to a 
servant, in order to prove that servant was not a 
slave. "What"' he says, "property inherit 
property?" I answer, yes. Two years ago, in 



62 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

my county, Williau Hansbrough gave to his 
slaves his estate, worth forty or fifty thousand 
dollars. In the last five or six years, over two 
hundred slaves, within a few miles of me, 
belonging to various masters, have inherited 
portions of their masters' estates. 

To render slaves valuable, the Romans qualified 
them for the learned professions, and all the va- 
rious arts. They were teachers, doctors, authors, 
mechanics, &c. So with us, tradesmen of every 
kind are to be found among our slaves. Some of 
them are undertakers — some farmers — some over- 
seers, or stewards — some housekeepers — some mer- 
chants — some teamsters, and some money-lenders, 
who give their masters a portion of their income, 
and keep the balance. Nearly all of them have 
an income of their own — and was it not for the 
seditious spirit of the North, we would educate 
our slaves generally, and so fit them earlier for a 
more improved condition, and higher moral eleva- 
tion. 

But will all this, when duly certified, prove 
they are not slaves? No. Neither will Abraham's 
intention to give one of his servants his estate, 
juove that he was not a slave. Who had higher 
claims upon Abraham, before he had a child, 
than this faithful slave, born in his house, reared 
by his hand, devoted to his interest, and faithful 
in every trust ? 

5th. His fifth reference, my correspondent says, 
"forever sets the question at rest." It is this: 
"Thou shalt not deliver unto his master, the 



OF SLAVERY. G3 

servant which is escaped from his master unto 
thee — he shall dwell with thee, even in that 
j)lace which he shall choose, in one of thy gates, 
where it liketh him best ; thou shalt not oppress 
him." 

This my distinguished correspondent says, 
"forever puts the question at rest." My reader, I 
hope, will ask himself what question it puts to 
rest. He will please to remember, that it is 
brought to put this question to rest, "Is slavery 
sinful in the sight of God?" the Bible being 
judge — or "did God ever allow one man to hold 
j)roperty in another?" 

My correspondent admits this to be the ques- 
tion at issue. He asks, "What is slavery?" 
And thus answers : "It is the principle involved 
in holding man as property." "This," he says: 
"is the point at issue." He says, "if it be right 
to hold man as property, it is right to treat him 
as property," &-c. Now, conceding all in the 
argument, that can be demanded for this law 
about runaway slaves, yet it does not prove that 
slavery or holding property in man is sinful — 
because it' is a part and parcel of the Mosaic law, 
given to Israel in the wilderness by the same 
God, who in the same wilderness enacted " that 
of the heathen that were round about them, they 
should buy bond-men and bond-women — also of 
the strangers that dwelt among them should they 
buy, and they should pass as an inheritance to 
their children after them, to possess them as 
bond-men forever." — Levit. xxv : 44. 



64 SCKIPTURAL VIEW 

How can I admit that a prohibition to deliver 
up a runaway slave, under the law of Moses, is 
proof that there was no slavery allowed under 
that law ? Here is the law from God himself, — 
Levit. xxv : 44, authorizing the Israelites to buy 
slaves and transmit them and their increase as a 
possession to their posterity forever — and to make 
slaves of their captives taken in war. — Deut. xx : 
10 — 15. Suppose, for argument's sake, I admit 
that God prohibited the delivery back of one of 
these slaves, when he fled from his master — would 
that prove that he was not a slave before he fled? 
Would that prove that he did not remain legally 
a slave in the sight of God, according to his own 
law, until he fled? The passage proves the very 
reverse of that which it is brought to -prove. It 
proves that the slave is recognized by God him- 
self as a slave, until he fled to the Israelites. My 
correspondent's exposition of this law seems based 
upon the idea that God, who had held fellowship 
with slavery amon^g his people for five hundred 
years, and who had just given them a formal 
statute to legalize the purchase of slaves from the 
heathen, and to enslave their captives taken in 
war, was, nevertheless, desirous to abolish the 
institution. But, as if afraid to march directly 
up to his object, he was disposed to undermine 
what he was unwilling to attempt to overthrow. 

Upon the principle that man is prone to think 
God is altogether such an one as himself, we may 
account for such an interpretation at the present 
time, by men north of Mason & Dixon's line. 



OF .SLAVERY. C>5 

Our brethren there have held fellowship with this 
institution, by the constitutional oath they have 
taken to protect us in this property. Unable, 
constitutionally, to overthrow the institution, they 
see, or think they see, a sanction in the law of 
God to undermine it, by opening their gates and 
letting our runaway slaves " dwell among them 
where it liketh them best." If I could be aston- 
ished at anything in this controversy, it would be 
to see sensible men engaged in the study of that 
part of the Bible which relates to the rights of 
property, as established by the Almighty himself, 
giving in to the idea that the Judge of the world, 
acting in the character of a national law-giver, 
would legalize a property right in slaves, as he 
did — give full power to "the master to govern — 
secure the increase as an inheritance to posterity 
for all time to come — and then add a clause to 
legalize a fraud upon the unsuspecting purchaser. 
For what better is it, under this interpretation ? 
With respect to slaves purchased of the hea- 
then, or enslaved by war, the law passed a clear 
title to them and their increase forever. With re- 
spect to the hired servants of the Hebrews, the law 
secured to the master a right to their service until 
the Sabbatic year or Jubilee — unless they were 
bought back by a near kinsman at a stated price 
in money when owned by a heathen master. But 
these legal rights, under these laws of heaven's 
King, by this interpretation, are all canceled — 
for the pecuniary loss, there is no redress — and 
for the insult no remedy, whenever a "liketh him 



66 SCBIPTUJRAL VIEW 

best" man can induce the slave to runaway. And 
worse still, the community of masters thus insult- 
ed and swindled, according to this interpretation, 
are bound to show respect and afford protection 
to the villians who practise it. Who can believe 
all this £ I judge our northern brethren will say, 
the Lord deliver us from such legislation as this. 
So say Ave. What, then, does this runaway law 
mean ? It means that the G-od of Israel ordained 
his people to be an asylum for the slave who fled 
from heathen cruelty to them for protection ; it 
is the law of nations — but surrendered under the 
Constitution by these States, who agreed to 
deliver them up. See, says God, ye oppress not 
the stranger. Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, 
nor op}wess him. — Ex. xxii: 21. 

His 6th reference to the Bible is this: a Do 
to others as ye would they should do to you." I 
have shown in the essay, that these words of our 
Saviour, embody the same moral principle, which 
is embodied by Moses in Levit. xix : 18, in these 
words, " Love thy neighbor as thyself." In this 
we cannot be mistaken, because Jesus says there 
are but two such principles in God's moral gov- 
ernment — one of supreme love to God — another of 
love to our neighbor as ourself. To the everlast- 
ing confusion of the argument from moral pre- 
cepts, to overthrow the positive institution of 
slavery, this moral precept was given to regulate 
the mutual duties of this very relation, which 
God by law ordained for the Jewish common- 
wealth. 



OF SLAVERY. G7 

How can that which regulates the duty, over- 
throw the relation itself? 

His 7th reference is, "They which are account- 
ed to rule over the Gentiles, exercise lordship 
over them, but so it shall not be among you." 

Turn to the passage, reader, in Mark x : 42; 
and try your ingenuity at expounding, and see if 
yoti can destroy one relation that has been created 
among men, because the authority given in an- 
other relation was abused. The Saviour refers to 
the abuse of State authority, as a warning to those 
who should be clothed with authority in his king- 
dom, not to abuse it, but to connect the use of it 
with humility. But how official humilty in the 
kingdom of Christ, is to rob States of the right 
to make their own laws, dissolve the relation of 
slavery recognized by the Saviour as a lawful 
relation, and overthrow the right of proiiert}' in 
slaves as settled by God himself, I know not. 
Paul, in drawing the character of those who 
oppose slavery, in his letter to Timoth}', says, 
(vi : 4,) they are "proud, knowing nothing ;" he 
means, that they were puffed with a conceit of 
their superior sanctity, while they were deplora- 
bly ignorant of the will of Christ on this subject. 
Is it not great pride that leads a man to think 
he is better than the Saviour ? Jesus held fel- 
lowship with, and enjoined subjection to govern- 
ments, which sanctioned slavery in its worst 
form — but abolitionists refuse fellowship for gov- 
ernments which have mitigated all its rigors. 

God established the relation by law, and be- 



68 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

stowed the highest manifestations of his favor 
upon slaveholders ; and has caused it to be writ- 
ten as with a sunbeam in the Scriptures. Yet 
such saints would be refused the ordinary tokens 
of Christian fellowship among abolitionists. If 
Abraham were on earth, they could not let him, 
consistently, occupy their pulpits, to tell of the 
things God has prepared for them that love hfm^ 
Job himself would be unfit for their communion. 
Joseph would be placed on a level with pirates. 
Not a single church planted by the Apostles 
would make a fit home for our abolition brethren, 
(for they all had masters and slaves.) The Apos- 
tles and their ministerial associates could not 
occupy their pulpits, for they fraternized with 
slavery, and upheld state authority upon the sub- 
ject. Now, I ask, witli due respect for all parties 
can sentiments which lead to such results as these 
be held by any man, in the absence of pride of no 
ordinary character, whether he be sensible of it 
or not? 

Again, whatever of intellect we may have — can 
that something which prompts to results like 
these be Bible knowledge ? 

Reference the 8th is favorable in sound if not 
insen.se. It is in these words, "Neither be ye 
called masters, for one is your master, even 
Christ." I am free to confess, it is difficult to 
repress the spirit which the prophet felt when he 
witnessed the zeal of his deluded countrymen, at 
Mount Carmel. I think a sensible man ought to 
know better, than to refer me to such a passage, 



OF SLAVERY. 69 

to prove slavery unlawful ; yet ray corrcpondent 
is a sensible man. However, I will balance it by 
an equal authority, for dissolving another rela- 
tion. "Call no man father upon earth, for one is 
your father in heaven." 

When the last abolishes the relation between 
parent and child, the first will abolish the relation 
between master and servant. 

The 9th reference to prove slavery unlawful in 
the sight of God, is this : He that stealeth a man, 
and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, 
he shall surely be put to death." Wonderful! 

I suppose that no State has ever established do- 
mestic slavery, which did not find such a law ne- 
cessary. It is this institution which makes such a 
law needful. Unless slavery exists, there would 
be no motive to steal a man. And, the danger is 
greater in a slave State than a free one. Virginia 
has such a law, and so have all the States of 
North America. 

Will these laws prove four thousand years 
hence that slavery did not exist in the United 
States ? No — but why not ! Because the statute 
will still exist, which authorizes us to buy bond- 
men and bond-women with our money, and give 
them and their increase as an inheritance to our 
children, forever. So the Mosaic statute still 
exists, which authorized the Jews to do the same 
thing, and God is its author. 

Reference the 10th is: "Rob not the poor 
because he is poor. Let the oppressed go free ; 
break every yoke ; deliver him that is spoiled out 



70 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

of the hand of the oppressor. What doth the 
Lord require of thee but to do justly, love mercy, 
walk humbly with thy God. He that oppresseth 
the poor reproacheth his Maker." This sounds 
very well, reader, yet I propose to make every 
man who reads me, confess, that these Scriptures 
will not condemn slavery. Answer me this ques- 
tion : Are these, and such like passages, in the 
Old Testament, from whence they are all taken, 
intended to reprove and condemn that people, for 
doing what God, in his law gave them a right to 
do? I know you must answer, they were not; 
consequently, you confess they do not condemn 
slavery ; because God gave them the right, by 
law, to purchase slaves of the heathen. — Levit. 
xxv : 44. And to make slaves of their captives 
taken in war. — Deut. xx : 14. The moral pre- 
cepts of the Old or New Testament cannot make 
that wrong which God ordained to be his will, as 
lie has slavery. 

The 11th reference of my distinguished corres- 
pondent to the sacred volume, to prove that 
slavery is contrary to the will of Jesus Christ 
and sinful, is in these words: " Masters, give 
unto your servants that which is just and equal." 
The argument of my correspondent is this, that 
slavery is a relation, in which rights based upon 
justice cannot exist. 

I answer, God ordained, after man sinned, that 
he, " should eat bread (that is, have food and 
raiment) in the sweat of his face." 

He has since ordained, that some should be 



OF SLAVERY. 71 

slaves to others, (as we have proved under the 
first reference.) Therefore, when food and rai- 
ment are withheld from him in slavery, it is 
unjust. 

God has ordained food and raiment, as wages 
for the sweat of the face. Christ has ordained 
that with these, whether in slavery or freedom, 
his disciples shall be content. 

The relation of master and slave, says Gibbon, 
existed in every province and in every family of 
the Koman Empire. Jesus ordains in the 13th 
chapter of Eomans, from the 1st to the end of 
the 7th verse, and in 1 Peter, 2nd chapter, 13th, 
14th, and loth verses, that the legislative author- 
ity, which created the relation, should be obeyed 
and honored by his disciples. But while he thus 
legalizes the relation of master and slave as estab- 
lished by the civil law, he proceeds to prescribe 
the mutual duties which the parties, when they 
come into his kingdom, must perform to each 
other. 

The reference of my correspondent to disprove 
the relation, is a part of what Jesus has prescibed 
on this subject to regulate the duties of the rela- 
tion, and is itself proof that the relation existed — 
that its legality was recognized — and its duties 
prescribed by the Son of God through the Holy 
Ghost given to the Apostles. 

The 12th reference is, "Let as many servants 
as are under the yoke, count their masters worthy 
of all honor. And they that have believing mas- 
ters, let them not despise them because they are 



72 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

brethren, but rather do them service, because 
they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the 
benefit." If my reader will turn to my remarks, 
in my first essay upon this Scripture he will cease 
to wonder that it fails to convince me that slavery 
is sinful. I should think the wonder would 
be, that any man ever quoted it for such a pur- 
pose. 

And lastly. My correspondent informs mo 
that the Greek word "doulos," translated ser- 
vant, means hired servant and not slave. 

I reply, that the primary meaning of this 
Greek word, is in a singular state of preserva- 
tion. God, as if foreseeing and providing for 
this controversy, has caused, in his providence, 
that its meaning in Greek dictionaries shall be 
thus given, "the opposite of free." Now, read- 
ers, what is the opposite of free? Is it a state 
somewhere behveen freedom and slavery? If 
freedom, as a condition, has an opposite, that 
opposite state is indicated by this very word 
"doulos." So says every Greek lexicographer. 
I ask, if this is not wonderful, that the Holy 
Ghost has used a term, so incapable of deceiving, 
and yet that that term should be brought forward 
for the purpose of deception. Another remarkag 
ble fact is this : the English word servant, origi- 
nally meant precisely the same thing as the 
Greek word "doulos ;" that is, says Dr. Johnson 
in his Dictionary, it meant formerly a captive 
taken in war, and reserved for slavery. These 
are two remarkable facts in the providence of 



OP SLAVERY. 73 

God. But, reader, I will give you a Bible key, 
by which to decide for yourself, without foreign 
aid, whether servant, when it denotes a relation 
in society, where the other side of that relation 
is master, means hired servant. '''Every man's 
servant that is bought for money shall eat there- 
of; but a hired servant shall not eat thereof." — 
Exod. xii: 44, 45. Here are two classes of serv- 
ants alluded to — one was allowed to eat the Pass- 
over the night Israel left Egypt; the other not. 
What was the difference in these two classes? 
Were they both hired servants? If so, it should 
read, "Every hired servant that is bought for 
money shall eat thereof; but a hired servant that 
is bought for money, shall not eat thereof." My 
reader, why has the Holy Ghost, in presiding 
over the inspired pen, been thus particular? Is 
it too much to say, it was to provide against the 
delusion of the nineteenth century, which learned 
men would be practicing upon unlearned men, as 
well as themselves, on the subject of slavery? 
Who, with the Bible and their learning, would 
not be able to discover, that a servant bought 
with money was a slave ; and that a' hired servant 
was a free man ? Again, Levit. xxv : 44, 45, and 
46 ; " Thy bond-servants shall be of the heathen 
that are round about you, and of the children of 
the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them 
shall ye buy. And they shall be your possession 
and ye shall take them as an inheritance, for 
your children after you, to inherit them for 

D 



*4 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

a possession, they shall be your bond-men for- 
ever." 

Reader, were these hired servants? If so, they 
hired themselves for a long time. And what is 
very singular, they hired their posterity for all 
time to come. And what is still more singular, 
the wages were paid, not to the servant, but to a 
former owner or master. And what is still 
stranger, they hired themselves and their poster- 
ity to be an inheritance to their master and his 
posterity forever ! Yet, reader, I am told by my 
distingushed correspondent, that servant in the 
Scriptures, when used to designate a relation, 
means only hired servant. Again, I ask, were 
the enslaved captives in Deut. xx : 10, 11, 12, 13, 
14, 15, hired servants ? 

One of the greatest and best of men ever 
raised at the North, (I mean Luther Rice,) once 
told me when I quoted the law of God for the 
purchase of slaves from the heathen, (in order to 
silence his argument about " doulos," and hired 
servant,) I say he told me positively, there was 
no such law. When I opened the Bible and 
showed it to "him, his shame was very visible. 
(And I hope he is not the only great and good 
man, that God will put to shame for being igno- 
rant of his Word.) But he never opened his 
mouth to me about slavery again Avhile he lived. 

If my reader does no better than he did, at 
least let him not fight against God for establish- 
ing the institution of "chattel" slavery in his 
kingdom, nor against me for believing he did do 



OF SLAVERY. 75 

it. But, reader, if you have the hardihood to 
insist that these were hired servants, and not 
slaves after all, then; I answer, that ours are 
hired servants, too, and not slaves ; and so the 
dispute ends favorably to the South, and it is 
lawful for us, according to abolition admissions, 
to hold them to servitude. For ours, we paid 
money to a former owner ; so did the Jews for 
theirs. The increase of ours passes as an inher- 
itance to our children, so did the increase of the 
Jewish servants pass as an inheritance to their 
children, to be an inheritance forever. And all 
this took place by the direction of <xod to his 
chosen people. 

My correspondent thinks with Mr. Jefferson, 
that Jehovah has no attributes that will harmo- 
nize with slavery ; and that all men are born 
free and equal. Now, I say let him throw away 
liis Bible as Mr. Jefferson did his, and then they 
will be fit companions. But never disgrace the 
Bible by making Mr. Jefferson its expounder, nor 
Mr. Jefferson by deriving his sentiments from it. 
Mr. Jefferson did not bow to the authority of the 
Bible, and on this subject I do not bow to him. 
How can any man, who believes the Bible, admit 
fur a moment that God intended to teach mankind 
by the Bible ; that all are born free and equal ? 

Men who engage in this controversy ought to 

look into the Bible, and see what is in it about 

slavery. I do not know how to account for such 

men saying, as my correspondent docs, that the 

slave of the Mosaic law, purchased of the hea- 
d2 



76 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

then, was a hired servant ; and that both he and 
the Hebrew hired servant of the same law, had a 
passport from God to run- away from their mas- 
ters with impunity, to prove which is the object 
of one of his quotations. Again, New Testa- 
ment servants and masters are not the servants 
and masters of the Mosaic law, but the servants 
and masters of the Koman Empire. To go to 
the law of Moses to find out the statutes of the 
Koman Empire, is folly. Yet on this subject the 
■ difference is not great, and so far as humanity 
(in the abolition sense of it) is concerned, is in 
favor of the Roman law. 

The laws of each made slaves to be property, 
and allowed them to be bought and sold. Seo 
Gibbon's Rome, vol. i: pp. 25, 2G, and Lev. xxv: 
44, 45, 46. The laws of each allowed prisoners 
taken in war to be enslaved. See Gibbon as 
above, and Deut. xx: 10 — 15. The difference 
was this : the Roman law allowed men taken in 
"battle to be enslaved — the Jewish law required 
the men taken in battle to be put to death, and to 
enslave their wives and children. In the case of 
the Midianites, the mercy of enslaving some of 
the women was denied them because they had 
enticed the Israelites into sin, and subjected them 
to a heavy judgment under Balaam's counsel, and 
for a reason not assigned, the mercy of slavery 
was denied to the male children in this special 
case. See Numbers xxxi : 15, 16, 17. 

The first letter to Timothy, while at Ephesus, 
if rightly understood, would do much to stay the 



OF SLAVERY. 17 

bands of men, who have more zeal than know- 
ledge on this subject. See again what I have 
written in my first essay on this letter. In addi- 
tion to what I have there said, I would state, that 
the "other doctrine," 1 Tim. i : 2, which Paul 
says, must not be taught, I take to be a principle 
tantamount to this, that Jesus Christ proposed 
to subordinate the civil to ecclesiastical authority. 

The doctrine which was ''according to godliness," 
1 Tim, vi: 3, I take to be a principle which subor- 
dinated the church, or Christ in his members, to 
civil governments, or "the powers that be." One 
principle was seditious, and when consummated 
must end in the man of sin. The other principle 
was practically a quiet submission to govern- 
ment, as an ordinance of God in the hands of 
men. 

The Abolitionists, at Ephesus, in attempting to 
interfere with the relations of slavery, and to 
unsettle the rights of property, acted upon a 
principle, which statesmen must see, would in 
the end, subject the whole frame-work of govern- 
ment to the supervision of the chui#h, and termi- 
nate in the man of sin, or a pretended successor 
of Christ, sitting in the temple of God, and 
claiming a right to reign over, and control the 
civil governments of the world. The Apostle, 
therefore, chapter ii: 1, to render the doctrine of 
subordination to the State a very prominent 
doctrine, and to cause the knowledge of it to 
spread among all who attended their worship, 

orders that the very first thing done by the 
d3 



78 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

church should he, that of making supplication, 
prayers, and intercessions, and giving God thanks 
for all men that were placed in authority, "by tho 
State, for the administration of civil government. 
He assigns the reason for this injunction, "that 
we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all god- 
liness and honesty." 

My correspondent complains, that Abolitionists 
at the North are not safe when they come among 
us. They are much safer than the saints of 
Ephesus would have been in the Apostolic day, 
if Paul would have allowed the seditious doctrine 
to be propogated which our Northern brethren 
think it such a merit to preach, when it subjects 
them to no risk. How can they expect, in the 
nature of things, to lead a quiet and peacea- 
ble life when they come among us? They 
are organized to overthrow our sovereignty — to 
put our lives in peril, and to trample upon Bible 
principles, by which the rights of proj)erty are to 
be settled. 

Questions and strife's of words characterized 
the disputes oLthe Abolitionists at Ephesus about 
slavery. It is amusing and painful to see the 
questions and strifes of words in the piece of my 
correspondent. Many of these questions are 
about our property right in slaves. The substance 
of them is this: that the present title is not good, 
because the original title grew out of violence 
and injustice. But, reader, our original title was 
obtained in the same way which God in his law 
authorized his people to obtain theirs. They 



OP SLAVERY, 7'J 

obtained their slaves by purchase of those who 
made them captives in the hazards of war, or by 
conquest with their own sword. My correspon- 
dent speaks at one time as if ours were stolen in 
the first instance; but, as if forgetting that, in 
another place he says, that so great is the hazard 
attending the wars of Africa, that one life is lost 
for every two that are taken captive and sold into 
slavery. If this is stealing, it has at least the 
merit of being more manly than some that is 
practised among us. 

A case seems to have been preserved by tho 
Holy Ghost, as if to rebuke this abolition doctrine 
about property rights. It is the case of the King 
of Ammon, a heathen, on the one side, and 
Jephtha, who "obtained a good report by faith," 
on the other. It is consoling to us that we 
occupy the ground Jephtha did — and we may 
well suspect the correctness of the other side, 
because it is the ground occupied by Ammon. 
The case is this: A heathen is seen menacing 
Israel. Jephtha is selected by his countrymen to 
conduct the controversy. He sends a message to 
his menacing neighbor, to know why he had 
come out against him. He returned for answer, 
that it wag^ecause Israel held property to which 
they had no right. Jephtha answered, they had 
had it in possession for three hundred years. 
Ammon replied, they had no right to it, because 
it was obtained in tho first instance by violence. 
Jephtha replied, that it was held by the same sort 

of a title as that by which Amnion held his 
d4 



80 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

possessions — that is to say, whatever Amnion's 
|jod Chemosh enabled him to take in war, he con- 
sidered to he his of right ; and that Israel's God 
had assisted them to take this property, and they 
considered the title to he such an one as Ammon 
was hound to acknowledge. 

Ammon stickled for the eternal principle of 
righteousness, and contended that it had been 
violated in the first instance. But, reader, in the 
appeal made to the sword, God vindicated Israel's 
title.— Judges xi:. 12—32. 

And if at the present time, we take ground 
with Amnion about the rights of property, I will 
not say how much work we may have to do, nor 
who will prove the rightful owner of my corres- 
pondent's domicil; but certain I am, that by his 
Ammonitish principle of settling the rights of 
property, he will be ousted. 

Reader, in looking over the printed reply of 
my correspondent to his Southern friend, which 
occupies ten columns of a large newspaper, to see 
if I had overlooked any scripture, I find I have 
omitted to notice one reference to the sacred 
volume, which was made by him, for the general 
purpose of showing that the Scriptures abound 
with moral principles, and call inio exercise 
moral feelings inconsistent with slavery. It is 
this: "Inasmuch as you have done it unto one of 
the least of these my brethren, you have done it 
unto me." The design of the Saviour, in the 
parable from which these words are taken, in 
Matt. 25th, is, to impress strongly upon the 



OF SLAVERY. 81 

human mind, that character, deficient in correct 
moral feeling, will prove fatal to human hopes in 
a coming day. 

But, reader, will you stop and ask yourself, 
"What is correct moral feeling?" Is it abhor- 
rence and hatred to the will and pleasure of God? 
Certainly not. Then it is not abhorrence and 
-hatred of slavery, which seems to be a cardinal 
virtue at the North. It has been the will and 
pleasure of God to institute slavery by a law of 
his own, in that kingdom over which he imme- 
diately presided ; and to give it his 'sanction when 
instituted by the laws of men. The most eleva- 
ted morality is enjoined under both Testaments, 
upon the parties in this relation. There is 
nothing in the relation inconsistent with its 
exercise. 

My reader will remember that the subject in 
dispute is, whether involuntary and hereditary 
slavery was ever lawful in the sight of God, the 
Bible being judge. 

1. I have shown by the Bible, that God decreed 
this relation between the posterity of Canaan, 
and the posterity of Shem and Japheth. 

2. I have shown that God executed this decree 
by aiding the posterity of Shem, (at a time 
when "they were holiness to the Lord,") to 
enslave the posterity of Canaan in the days of 
Joshua. 

3. I have shown that when God ratified the 
covenant of promise with Abraham, he recognized 
Abraham as the owner of slaves- he had bought 

DO 



82 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

with his money of the stranger, and recorded his 
approbation of the relation, by commanding 
Abraham to circumcise them. 

4. I have shown that when he took Abraham's 
posterity by the hand in Egypt, five hundred 
years afterwards, he publicly approbated the 
same relation, by permitting every slave they 
had bought with their money to eat the passover, 
while he refused the same privilege to their hired 
servants. 

5. I have shown that God, as their national 
lawgiver, ordained by express statute,, that they 
should buy slaves of the nations around them, 
(the seven devoted nations excepted,) and that 
these slaves and their increase should be a per- 
petual inheritance to their children. 

6. I have shown that God ordained slavery by 
law for their captives taken in war, while he 
guaranteed a successful issue to their wars, so long 
as they obeyed him. 

7. I have shown that when Jesus ordered his 
gospel to be published through the world, the 
relation of master and slave existed by law in 
every province and family of the Roman Empire, 
as it had done in the Jewish commonwealth for 
fifteen hundred years. 

8. I have shown that Jesus ordained, that the 
legislative authority, which created this relation 
in that empire, should be obeyed and honored as 
an ordinance of God, as all government is de- 
clared to be. 

9. I have shown that Jesus has prescribed 



OF SLAVERY. 83 

the mutual duties of this relation in his king- 
dom. 

10. And lastly, I have shown, that in an 
attempt by his professed followers to disturb this 
relation in the Apostolic churches, Jesus orders 
that fellowship shall be disclaimed with all such 
disciples, as seditious persons — whose conduct 
was not only dangerous to the State, but destruc- 
tive to the true character of the gospel dispensa- 
tion. 

This being the case, as will appear by the 
recorded ^language of the Bible, to which we 
have referred you, reader, of what use is it 
to argue against it from moral requirements? 

They regulate the duties of this and all other 
lawful relations among men — but they cannot 
abolish any relation, ordained or sanctioned of 
God, as is slavery. 

I would be understood as referring for proof of 
this summary, to my first as well as my present 
essay. 

When I first wrote, I did suppose the Scrip- 
tures had been examined by leading men in the 
opposition, and that prejudice had blinded their 
eyes. I am now of a different opinion. What 
will be the effect of this discussion, I will not 
venture to predict, knowing human nature as 
well as I do. But men who are capable of exer- 
cising candor must see, that it is not against an 
institution unknown to the Bible, or declared by 
its author to be sinful, that the North is waging 
war. 

d6 



84 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

Their hostility must he transferred from us to 
God, who established slavery by law in that 
kingdom over which he condescended to preside ; 
and to Jesus, who recognized it as a relation 
established in Israel by his father, and in the 
Roman government by men, which he bound his 
followers to obey and honor. 

In defending the institution as one which has 
the sanction of our Maker, I have done what I 
considered, under the peculiar circumstances of 
our common country, to be a Christian duty. I 
have set down nought in malice. I have used no 
sophistry. I have brought to the investigation 
of the subject, common sense. I have not relied 
on powers of argument, learning, or ingenuity. 
These would neither put the subject into the 
Bible nor take it out. It is a Bible question. I 
have met it fairly, and fully, according to the 
acknowledged principles of the Abolitionists. I 
have placed before my reader what is in the Bible, 
to prove that slavery has the sanction of God, 
and is not sinful. I have placed before him what 
I suppose to be the quintessence of all that can 
be gleaned from the Bible to disprove it. 

I have made a few plain reflections to aid 
the understanding of my reader. What I have 
written was designed for those who reverence 
the Bible as their counsellor — who take it for 
rules of conduct, and devotional sentiments. 

I now commit it to God for his blessing, with 
a fervent desire, that if I have mistaken his will 
in anything, he will not suffer my error to mis- 
lead another. Thornton stringfellow. 



OF SLAVERY. 85 



[The following letter, in substance, was written to a brother in Kentucky, 
who solicited a copy of my slavery pamphlet, as well as my opinion on the 
movement in that State, ou the subject of emancipation.] 

Dear Brother: 

I received your letter, and the 
slavery pamphlet which you requested me to send 
you, I herewith enclose. 

When I published the first essay in that 
pamphlet, I intended to invite a discussion with 
I Elder Galusha, of New York ; and when I re- 
ceived Mr. Galusha's letter to Dr. Fuller, I still 
expected a discussion. But after manifesting, on 
his part, great pleasure in the outset, for the 
opportunity tendered him by a Southern man, to 
discuss this subject, he ultimately declined it. 
This being the case, I did not at that time present 
as full a view of the subject as the Scriptures 
furnish. I have since thought of supplying this 
deficiency ; and the condition of things in Ken- 
tucky furnishes a fit opportunity for saying to 
you, what I said to a brother in Pennsylvania, 
who, like yourself, requested me to send him a 
copy of my pamphlet. 

I do not know that I could add anything, be- 
yond what I said to him, that would be useful to 
you. To this brother I said, among other things, 
that Dr. Wayland (in his discussion with Dr. Ful- 
ler,) relied principally upon two arguments, used 
by all the intelligent abolitionists, to overthrow 
the weight of Scriptural authority in support of 



86 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

slavery. The first of these arguments is designed 
to neutralize the sanction given to slavery by the 
law of Moses ; and the second is designed to neu- 
tralize the sanction given to slavery by the New 
Testament. 

The Dr. frankly admits, that the law of Moses 
did establish slavery in the Jewish common- 
wealth ; and he admits with equal frankness, that 
it was incorporated as an element in the gospel 
church. For the purpose, however, of destroying 
the sanction thus given to the legality of the 
relation under the law of Moses, he assumes two 
things in relation to it, which are expressly con- 
tradicted by the law. He assumes,, in the first 
place, that the Almighty, under the law, gave a 
special permission to the Israelites to enslave the 
seven devoted nations, as a punishment for their 
sins. He then assumes, in the second place, that 
this special permission to enslave the seven na- 
tions, prohibited, by implication, the enslaving of 
all other nations. The conclusion which the Dr. 
draws from the above assumptions is this — that a 
special permission under the law, to enslave a par- 
ticular people, as a punishment for their sins, is 
not a general permission under the gospel, to en- 
slave all, or any other people. The premises here 
assumed, and from wdiich this conclusion is drawn 
are precisely the reverse of what is recorded in 
the Bible. 

The Bible statement is this : that the Israelites 
under the law, so far from being permitted or 
required to enslave the seven nations, as a pun- 



OP SLAVERY. 87 

ishment for their sins,'Were expressly commanded 
to destroy them utterly. Here is the proof — Deut. 
vii: 1 and 2: "When the Lord thy God shall 
bring thee into the land whither thou goest to 
possess it, and hath cast out many nations before 
thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the 
Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, 
and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations 
greater and mightier th'an thou ; and when the 
Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee, thou 
shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them, thou 
shalt make no covenant with them, nor show 
mercy unto them." And again, in Deut. xx : 16 
and 17 : "But of the cities of these people, which 
the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inherit- 
ance, thou shcdt save alive nothing that breatheth. 
But thou shalt utterly destroy them, namely, the 
Hittites, arfd the Amorites, the Canaanites, and 
the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as 
the Lord thy God hath commanded thee." This 
law was delivered by Moses, and was executed by 
Joshua some years afterwards, to the letter. 

Here is the proof of it, Josh, xi : 14 to 20 
inclusive : " And all the spoil of these cities, and 
the cattle, the children of Israel took for a prey 
unto themselves ; but every man they smote ivith 
the edge of the sword until they had destroyed them, 
neither left they any to breathe." 

" As the Lord commanded 3Ioses his servant; 
so did Moses command Joshua, and so did Joshua; 
he left nothing undone of all that the Lord com- 
manded Moses. So Joshua took all that land, 



88 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

the hills and all the south country, and all the 
land of Goshen, and the valley and the plain, 
and the mountain of Israel, and the valley of the 
same. Even from the mount Halak that goeth 
up to Sier, even unto Baalgad, in the valley of 
Lebanon, under mount Herrnon, and all their 
kings he took, and smote them, and slew them. 
Joshua made war a long time with all those 
kings. There was not*a city that made peace 
with the children of Israel, save the Hivites, the 
inhabitants of Gibeon, all others they took in bat- 
tle. For it was of the Lord to harden their 
hearts, that they should come against Israel in 
battle, that he might destroy them utterly, and that 
they might have no favor, but that he might de- 
stroy them, as the Lord commanded Moses." In 
this account of their destruction, the Gibeonites, 
who deceived Joshua, are excepted, and the reason 
given is, that Joshua in their case, failed to ask 
counsel at the mouth of the Lord. Here is the 
proof: "And the men took of them victuals, and 
asked not counsel of the mouth of the Lord." — 
(Josh, ix: 14.) This counsel Joshua was expressly 
commanded to ask, when he was ordained some 
time before, to be the executor of God's legislative 
will, by Moses. Here is the proof, (Numb, xxvii: 
18—23 :) "And the Lord said unto Moses, Take 
thee Joshua, the son of Nun, a man in whom 
is the spirit, and lay thy hand upon him ; and 
set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all 
the congregation ; and give him a charge in their 
sight. And thou shalt put some of thine honor 



UK SLAVERY. 8'J 

upon him, that all the congregation of the chil- 
dren of Israel may be obedient. And he shall 
stand before Eleazar the jwiest, who shall ask coun- 
sel for him, after the judgment of JJrim before the 
Lord: at his ivord shall they go out, and at his 
ivord shall they come in, both he and all the children 
of Israel with him, even all the congregation. 
And Moses did as the Lord commanded him ; 
and he took Joshua and set him before Eleazar 
the priest, and before all the congregation. And 
he laid his hands upon him, and gave him a 
clmrgc, as the Lord commanded by the hand of 
Moses." These scriptures furnish a palpable con- 
tradiction of the first assumption, that is — that 
the Lord gave a special permission to enslave the 
seven nations. The Lord ordered that they 
should be destroyed utterly. 

As to the second assumption, so far from the 
Israelites being prohibited bg implication, from 
enslaving the subjects of other nations, they 
were expressly authorized by the law to make 
slaves by war, of any other nation. Here is the 
proof — Dent, xx: 10 to 17 inclusive: "When 
thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, 
then proclaim peace unto it. And it shall be if 
it make thee answer of peace, and open unto 
thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is 
found therein, shall be tributaries unto thee, and 
they shall serve thee. And if it will make no 
peace with thee, but will make war against thee, 
then thou shalt besiege it. And when the Lord 
thy God hath delivered it into thy hands, then 



90 SCRIPTUKAL VIEW 

shalt thou smite every male thereof with the 
edge of the sword. But the women and the little 
ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, 
even all the spoils thereof, shalt thou take unto 
thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine 
enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given 
thee. Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which 
are very far off from thee which arc not of the 
cities of these nations. But of the cities of these 
people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee 
for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing 
that breatheth. But thou shalt utterly destroy them, 
namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaan- 
ites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the 
Jebusites, as the Lord thy God hath command- 
ed thee." They w r ere authorized also by the 
law, to purchase slaves with money of any 
nation except the seven. Here is the proof — ■ 
Lev. xxv: 44, 45, and 46: "Both thy bond-men 
and thy bond-maids, which thou shalt have, shall 
be of the heathen that are round about you ; 
(that is, round about the country given them of 
God, which' was the country of the seven nations 
they were soon to occupy ;) of them shall ye buy 
bond-men and bond-maids. Moreover, of the 
children of the strangers that do sojourn among 
you, (that is, the mixed multitude of strangers 
which came up with them from Egypt, mentioned 
in Exodus xii : 38,) of them shall ye buy, and of 
their families that are with you, which they begat 
in your land ; and they shall be your possession. 
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for 



OV SLAVERY. 91 

your children after you, to inherit them for a 
possession, they shall he your bond-men forever." 

Now, let it be noted that this first law, of 
Deut. xx : above referred to, which authorized 
them to make slaves by war of any other nation, 
was executed for the first time, under the direction 
of Moses himself, when thirty-two thousand of 
the Midianites were enslaved. These slaves were 
not of the seven nations. 

And it is worthy of further remark, that of 
each half, into which the Lord had these slaves 
divided, he claimed for his portion, one slave of 
every five hundred for the priests, and one slave 
of every fifty for the Levites. These slaves he 
gave to the priests and Levites, who were his 
representatives, to be their property forever. — 
Numb. xxxi. These scriptures palpably contra- 
dict the Dr.'s second assumption — that is, that 
they were proh lb I ted by implication from enslaving 
the subjects of any other nation. The Dr.'s as- 
sumptions being the antipodes of truth, they 
cannot furnish a conclusion that is warranted by 
the truth. 

The conclusion authorized by the truth, is 
this: that the making of slaves by war, and the 
purchase of slaves with money, was legalized by 
the Almighty in the Jewish commonwealth, 
as regards the subjects of all nations except the 
seven. 

The second argument of the Dr.'s, as I re- 
marked, is designed to neutralize the sanction 
given to slavery in the New Testament. 



92 



SCRIPTURAL VIEW 



The Dr. frankly admits that slavery was 
sanctioned by the Apostles in the Apostolic 
churches. But to neutralize this sanction, he re- 
sorts to two more assumptions, not only without 
proof, but palpably contradicted by the Old and. 
New Testament text. The first assumption is 
this — that polygamy and divorce were both sins 
under the law of Moses, although sanctioned by the 
law. And the second assumption is, that polyg- 
amy and divorce are known to be sins under the 
gospel, not by any gospel teaching or prohibition, 
but by the general principles of morality. From 
these premises the conclusion is drawn, that 
although slavery was sanctioned in the Apostolic 
church, yet it was a sin, because, like polygamy 
and divorce, it was contrary to the principles of 
the moral law. The premises from which this 
conclusion is drawn, are at issue with the word of 
God, and therefore the conclusion must be false. 
The first thing here assumed is, that polygamy 
and divorce, although sanctioned by the law of 
Moses, were both sins under that law. Now, so 
far from this being true, as to polygamy, it is a 
fact that polygamy was not only sanctioned, Avhen 
men chose to practice it, but it was expressly 
enjoined by the law in certain cases, and a most 
humiliating penalty annexed to the breech of the 
command. — Deut. xxv: 5—9. As sin is defined 
by the Holy Ghost to be a transgression of the 
law, it is impossible that polygamy could have 
been a sin under the law, unless it was a sin to 
obey the law, and an act of righteousness to 



OF SLAVERY. 93 

transgress it. That polygamy was a sin under 
the law, therefore, is palably false. 

As to divorce, the Almighty gave it the full 
and explicit sanction of his authority, in the law 
of Moses, for various causes. — (Dent, xxiv: 1.) 
For those causes, therefore, divorce' could not 
have been a sin under the law, unless human 
conduct, in exact accordance with the law of God, 
was sinful. The first thing assumed by the Dr., 
therefore, that polygamy and divorce were both 
sins, under the law, is proved to be false. They 
were lawful, and therefore, could not be sinful. 

The Dr.'s second assumption (with respect to 
polygamy and divorce,) is this, that they are 
known under the gospel to be sins, not by the 
prohibitory precepts of the gospel, but by the 
general principles of morality. This assumption 
is certainly a very astonishing one — for Jesus 
Christ in one breath has uttered language as per- 
fectly subversive of all authority for polygamy and 
divorce in his kingdom, as light is subversive of 
darkness. The Pharisees, ever desirous of ex- 
posing him to the prejudices and passions of the 
people, "asked him in the presence of great 
multitudes, who came with him from Galilee into 
the coasts of Judea beyond Jordan," whether he 
admitted, with Moses, the legality of divorce for 
every cause. Their object was to provoke him to 
the exercise of legislative authority ; to whom he 
promptly replied, that God made man at the 
beginning, male and female, and ordained that 
the male and female by marriage, should be ono 



94 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

flesh. And for satisfactory reasons, had sanctioned 
divorce among Abraham's seed ; and then adds, 
as a law-giver, "But I say unto you, that whoso- 
ever shall put away his wife, (except for fornica- 
tion,) and shall marry another, committeth 
adultery; and if a woman put away her hus- 
band, and marry again, she committeth adulte- 
r} r . Here polygamy and divorce die together. 
The law of Christ is, that neither party shall 
put the other away — that either party, taking 
another companion, while the first compan- 
ion lives, is guilty of adultery — consequently, 
polygamy and divorce are prohibited forever, 
unless this law is violated — and that violation is 
declared to be adultery, which excludes from his 
kingdom. — 1 Cor. vi: 9. After the church was 
organized, the Holy Ghost, by Paul, commands, 
let not the wife depart from her husband, but, 
and if she depart let her remain unmarried — and 
let not the husband put away his wife, 1 Cor. vii: 
10. Here divorce is prohibited to both parties; a 
second marriage according to Christ, would be 
adultery, while the first companion lives ; conse- 
quently, polygamy is prohibited also. 

This second assumption, therefore, that polyg- 
amy and divorce are known to be sins by moral 
principles and not by prohibitory precepts, is swept 
away by the words of Christ, and the teaching of 
the Holy Ghost. These unauthorized and dan- 
gerous assumptions are the foundation, upon 
which the Abolition structure is made to rest by 
the distinguished Dr. Wa viand. 



OF SLAVERY. 95 

The facts with respect to polygamy and divorce, 
warrant precisely the opposite conclusion ; that 
is, that if slavery under the gospel is sinful, then 
its sinfulness would have been made known by 
the gospel, as has been done with respect to 
polygamy and divorce. All three, polygamy, 
divorce and slavery, were sanctioned by the law 
of Moses. But under the gospel, slavery has been 
sanctioned in the church, while polygamy and 
divorce have been excluded from the church. It 
is manifest, therefore, that under the gospel, 
polygamy and divorce have been made sins, by 
prohibition, while slavery remains lawful because 
sanctioned and continued. The lawfulness of sla- 
very under the gospel, rests upon the sovereign 
pleasure of Christ, in permitting it; and the sin- 
fulness of polygamy and divorce, upon his sover- 
eign pleasure in prohibiting their continuance. 
The law of Christ gives to the relation of slavery 
its full sanction. That laiv is to be found, first, 
in the admission, by the Apostles, of slaveholders 
and their slaves into the gospel church ; second, 
in the j^ositive injunction by the Holy Ghost, of 
obedience on the part of Christian slaves in this 
relation, to their believing masters; third, in the 
absence of any injunction upon the believing mas- 
ter, under any circumstances, to dissolve this 
relation ; fourth, in the absence of any instruction 
from Christ or the Apostles, that the relation is 
sinful; and lastly, in the injunction of the Holy 
Ghost, delivered by Paul, to iviihdraw from all 
such as teach that this relation is sinful. Human 



96 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

conduct in exact accordance with the law of 
Christ thus proclaimed, and thus expounded by 
the Holy Ghost, in the. conduct and teaching of 
the Apostles, cannot be sinful. 

There are other portions of God's Word, in 
the light of which we may add to our stock of 
knowledge on this subject. For instance, the 
Almighty by Moses legalized marriage between 
female slaves and. Abraham's male descendants- 
But under this law the wife remained a slave 
still. If she belonged to the husband, then this 
law gave freedom to her children ; but if she 
belonged to another man, then her children, 
though born in lawful wedlock, were hereditary 
slaves. — Fxod. xxi : 4. Again, if a man marries 
his own slave, then he lost the right to sell her — 
if he divorced her, then she gained her freedom. 
Deut. xxii : 10 to 14, inclusive. Again, there 
was a law from God which granted rights to 
Abraham's sons under a matrimonial contract ; 
for a violation of the rights conferred by this law, 
a, free woman, and her seducer, forfeited their lives, 
Deut. xxi: 23 and 24; also 13 to 21, inclusive. 
But for the same offence, a slave only exposed 
herself to stripes, and her seducer to the penalty 
of a sheep.— Levit, xix : 20 to 22, inclusive. 
Again, there was a law which guarded his peo- 
ple, whether free or bond, from personal violence. 
If in vindictiveness, a man with an. unlawful 
weapon, maimed his own slave by knocking out 
his eye, or his tooth, the slave was to be free for 
this wanton act of personal violence, as a penalty 



OF SLAVERY. 97 

upon the master. — Exod. xxi : 26 to 27, inclusive. 
But for the same offence, committed against a 
free person, the offender had to pay an eye for an 
eye, and *a tooth for a tooth, as the penalty, 
Levit. xxiv : 19, 20, and Exod. xxi: 24 and 25, 
inclusive. Again, there was a law to guard the 
personal safety of the community against danger- 
ous stock. If an ox, known to be dangerous, was 
suffered to run at large and kill a person, if the 
person so killed was free, then the owner forfeited 
his life for his neglect, — Exod. xxi : 29. But if 
the person so killed was a slave, then the offender 
was fined thirty shekels of silver. — Exod. xxi : 
33. In some things, slaves among the Israelites, 
as among us, were invested with privileges above 
hired servants — they were privileged to eat the 
Passover, but hired servants were not, Exod. xii : 
44, 45 ; and such as were owned by the priests 
and Levites were privileged to eat of the holy 
things of their masters, but hired servants dare 
not taste them. — Levit. xxii: 10, 11. These are 
statutes from the Creator of man. They are cer- 
tainly predicated upon a view of things, in the 
Divine mind, that is someivhat different from that 
which makes an Abolitionist ; and, to say the 
least, they deserve consideration with all men 
who worship the God of the Bible, and not tho 
God of their own imagination. They show very 
clearly, that our Creator is the author of social, 
moral, and political inequality among men. 
That so far from the Scriptures teaching, as Abo-* 
litionists do, that all men have ever had a divine 



&8 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

right to freedom and equality, they show, in so 
many ivords, that marriages were sanctioned of 
God as lawful, in which he enacted, that the chil- 
dren of free men should he horn hereditary slaves. 
They show also, that he guarded the chastity of 
the free by the price of life,, and the chastity of 
the slave by the rod. They show, that in the 
judgment of God;, the life of a free man in the 
days of Moses, was too sacred for commutation, 
while a fine of thirty shekels of silver was suffi- 
cient to expiate for the death of a slave. As I 
said in my first essay, so I say now, this is a con- 
troversy between Abolitionists and their Maker. 
I see not how, with their present views and in 
their present temper, they can stop short of 
blasphemy against that Being who enacted these 
laws. 

Of late years, some obscure passages (which 
have no allusion whatever to the subject) have 
been brought forward to show, that God hated 
slavery, although the work of his own hands. 
Once for all, I challenge proof, that in the Old 
Testament or the New, any reproof was ever 
tittered against involuntary slavery, or against any 
abuse of its authority. Upon Abolition principles, 
this is perfectly unaccountable, and of itself, is 
an unanswerable argument that the relation is 
not sinful. 

The opinion has been announced also of late, 
that slavery among the Jews was felt to be an 
fcil, and, by degrees, that they abolished it. To 
ascertain the correctness of this opinion, let the 



OF SLAVERY. 99 

following consideration be weighed: After cen- 
turies of cruel national bondage practised upon 
Abraham's seed in Egypt, they were brought in 
godly contrition to pour out "the effectual fervent 
prayer " of a righteous people, to the Almighty 
for mercy, and were answered by a covenant God, 
who sent Moses to deliver them from their bon- 
dage — but let it be remembered, that when this 
deliverance from bondage to the nation of Egypt 
was vouchsafed to them, they were extensive 
domestic slave owners. G-od had not by his provi- 
dential dealings, nor in any other way, shown 
them the sin of domestic slavery — for they held 
on to their slaves, and brought them out as their 
property into the wilderness. And it is worthy 
of further remark, that the Lord, before they left 
Egypt, recognized these slaves as property, which 
• they had bought with their money,, and that he 
secured to these slaves privileges above hired 
servants, simply because they were slaves. — Exod. 
xii: 44, 45. And let it be noticed further, that 
the first law passed by the Almighty after pro- 
claiming the ten commandments or moral con- 
stitution of the nation, was a law to regulate 
property rights in hereditary slaves, and to regu- 
late property rights in Jewish hired servants for 
a term of years. — Exod. xxii: 1 to 6, inclusive. 
And let it be considered further, that when the 
Israelites were subjected to a cruel captivity in 
Babylon, more than eight hundred years after 
this, they were still extensive slave-owners; that 
when humbled and brought to repentance for 
e2 






100 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

their sins, and the Lord restored them to their 
own land again, that he brought them back to 
their old homes as slave-owners. Although 
greatly impoverished by a seventy years' captivity 
in a foreign land, yet the slaves which they 
brought up from Babylon bore a proportion of 
nearly one slave for every five free persons that 
returned, or about o"ne slave for every family. — ■ 
Ezra ii: 64, 65. Now, can we, in the face of these 
facts, believe they were tired of slavery when 
they came up out of Egypt? It had then existed 
five hundred years. Or can we believe they were 
tired of it when they came up from Babylon? 
It had then existed among them fourteen hun- 
dred years. Or can we believe that God put 
them into these schools of affliction in Egypt and 
Babylon to teach them, (and all others through 
them,) the sinfulness of slavery, and yet, that he 
brought them out without giving them the first 
hint that involuntary slavery was a sin? And 
let it be further considered, that it was the busi- 
ness of the prophets which the Lord raised up, to 
make hiown to them tlie sins for which his judgments 
were sent upon them. The sins which he charged 
upon them in all his visitation are upon record. 
Let any man find involuntary slavery in any of 
God's indictments against them, and I. will retract 
all I have ever written. 

In my original essay, I said nothing of Paul's 
letter to Philemon, concerning Onesimus, a runa- 
way slave, converted under Paul's preaching at 
Rome; and who was returned by the Apostle, 



OF SLAVERY. 10 1 

with a most affectionate letter to his master, 
entreating the master to receive him again, and 
to forgive him. 0, how immeasurably different 
Paul's conduct to this slave and his master, from 
the conduct of our Abolition brethren ! Which, 
are we to think is guided by the Spirit of God? 
It is impossible that both can be guid|d by that 
Spirit, unless sweet water and bitter caii come 
from the same fountain. This letter, of itself, is 
sufficient to teach any man, capable of being 
taught in the ordinary way, that slavery is not, 
in the sight of God, what it is in the sight of the 
Abolitionists. 

I had prepared the argument furnished by this 
letter for my original essay; I afterwards struck 
it out, because at that time, so little had the 
Bible been examined at the North in reference to 
slavery, that the Abolitionists very generally 
thought this was the only scripture which South- 
ern slaveholders could find, giving any coun- 
tenance to their views of slavery. To test the 
correctness of this opinion, therefore, I determined 
to make no allusion to it at that time. 

Now, my dear sir, if, from the evidence con- 
tained in the Bible to prove slavery a lawful 
relation among God's people under every dispen- 
sation, the assertion is still made, in the very 
face of this evidence, that slavery has ever been 
the greatest sin — everywhere, and under all cir- 
cumstances — can you, or can any sane man bring 
himself to believe, that the mind capable of such 
e3 



102 SCRIPTURAL VIEW 

a decision, is not capable of trampling the Word 
of God under foot upon any subject? 

If it were not known to be the fact, we could 
not admit that a Bible-reading man could bring 
himself to believe, with Dr. Wayland, that a 
thing made lawful by the God of heaven, was, 
notwithstanding, the greatest sin — and that Moses 
under the law, and Jesus Christ under the gospel, 
had sanctioned and regulated in practice, the 
greatest sin known on earth — and that Jesus had 
left his church to find out as best they might, 
that the law of God which established slavery 
under the Old Testament, and the precepts of the 
Holy Ghost which regulate the mutual duty of 
master and slave under the New Testament, were 
laws and precepts, to sanction and regulate among 
the people of God the greatest sin which was ever 
perpetrated. 

It is by no means strange that it should have 
taken seventeen centuries to make such discoveries 
as the above, and it is worthy of note, that these 
discoveries were made at last by men who did not 
appear to know, at the time they made them, 
what was in the Bible on the subject of slavery, 
and who now appear unwilling that the teachings 
of the Bible should be spread before the people — 
this last I take to be the case, because I have 
been unable to get the Northern press to give it 
publicity. 

Many anti-slavery men into whose hands my 
essays chanced to fall, have frankly confessed to 



OF SLAVERY. 



103 



me, that in their Bible reading, they had over- 
looked the plain teaching of the Holy Ghost, by 
taking what they read in the Bible about masters 
and servants, to have reference to hired servants 
and their employers. 

You ask me for my opinion about the emanci- 
pation movement in the State af Kentucky. I 
hold that the emancipation of hereditary slaves 
by a State is not commanded, or in any way re- 
quired by the Bible. The Old Testament and 
the New, sanction slavery, but under no circum- 
stances enjoin its abolition, • even among saints. 
Now, if religion, or the duty we owe our Creator, 
was inconsistent with slavery, then this could not 
be so. If pure religion, therefore, did not re- 
quire its abolition under the law of Moses, nor 
in the church of Christ — we may safely infer, 
that our political, moral, and social relations do 
not require it in a State; unless a State requires 
higher moral, social, and religious qualities in its 
subjects, than a gospel church. 

Masters have been left by the Almighty, both 
under the patriarchal, legal, and gospel dispen- 
sations, to their individual discretion on the sub- 
ject of emancipation. 

The principled justice inculcated by the Bible, 
refuses to sanction, it seems to me, such an outrage 
upon the rights of men, as would be perpetrated 
by any sovereign State, which, to-day, makes a 
thing to be property, and to-morrow, takes it 
from the lawful owners, without political necessity 
or pecuniary compensation. Now, if it be morally 
e4 



104 



SCKIPTUKAL VIEW 



right for a majority of the people (and that 
majority possibly a meagre one, who may not 
own a slave) to take, without necessity or com- 
pensation, the property in slaves held by a mi- 
nority, (and that minority a large one,) then it 
would be morally right for a majority, without 
property, to take anything else that may be law- 
fully owned by the prudent and care-taking por- 
tion of the citizens. 

As for intelligent philanthropy, it shudders at 
the infliction of certain ruin upon a whole race of 
helpless beings. If emancipation by law is phi- 
lanthropic in Kentucky, it is, for the same reasons, 
philanthropic in every State in the Union. But 
nothing in the future is more certain, than that 
such emancipation would begin to work the deg- 
radation and final ruin of the slave race, from 
the clay of its consummation. 

Break the master's sympathy, which is in- 
separably connected with his property right in 
his slave, and that moment the slave race is placed 
upon a common level with all other competitors 
for the rewards of merit; but as the slaves are 
inferior in the qualities which give success among 
competitors in our country, extreme poverty would 
be their lot; and for the want of means to rear 
families, they would multiply slowly, and die out 
by inches, degraded by vice and crime, unpitied 
hy honest and virtuous men, aud heart-broken by 
sufferings without a parallel. 

So long as States let masters alone on this sub- 
ject, good men among them, both in the church 



OF SLAVERY. 105 

and out of it, will struggle on, as experience may 
dictate and justify, for the benefit of the slave 
race. And should the time ever come, when 
emancipation in its consequences, will comport 
with the moral, social, and political obligations 
of Christianity, then Christian masters will invest 
their slaves with freedom, and then will the 
good-will of those follow the descendants of 
Ham, who, without any agency of their own, 
have been made in this land of liberty, their 
providential guardians. 

Yours, with affection, 

THORNTON BTRLNGFELLOW. 

[ It is or ought to be known to all men, that African slavery in the United 
States originated in, and is perpetuated by a social and political necessity, and 
that its continuance is demanded equally by the highest interests of both races. 
All writers on public law, from Drs. Channing and Wayland, among the Aboli- 
tionists, up to the highest authorities on national law, admit the necessity and 
propriety of slavery in a social body, whenever men will not provide for their 
own wants, and yield obedience to the law which guards the rights of others. 
The guardianship and control of the black race, by the white, in this Union, is 
an indispensable Christian duty, to which we must as yet look, if we would 
secure the well-being of both races.] 



e5 



STATISTICAL VIEW. 



STATISTICAL VIEW 

OF 

S L A. V E R Y . 



To satisfy the conscientiousness of Christians, 
I published in the Herald, some years past, Bible 
evidence, to prove slavery a lawful relation among 
men. In a late communication you* refer to this 
essay, and express a wish that it should be re- 
published. Many have expressed a similar wish. 

Some who admit the legality of slavery in the 
eight of God, question the expediency of its expan- 
sion. It is believed by them to be an element 
that is hostile to the best interests of society, 
and therefore, great efforts have been, and are 
now being made, to exclude it from all the new 
States and Territories which may hereafter be 
organized upon our soil. 

While the expediency of its expansion, or con- 
tinuance, are questions with which I have not 
heretofore meddled, yet I hold their investigation 
to be within the legitimate range of Christian 
duty. 

"This letter was addressed to Elder James Fife. 



110 STATISTICAL VIEW 

If unquestionable/acfe and experience warrant 
the conclusion, that while slavery is lawful, yet its 
continuance or expansion among us is inexpedient, 
then let us act accordingly. 

Being prompted by your request, I propose to - 
examine/acte, which are admitted the world over, 
as evidence of prosperity and happiness in a com- 
munity, and to compare the evidence thus fur- 
nished in different sections of our country, where 
the experiment of freedom, and the experiment 
of slavery have been fully and fairly upon trial 
since the commencement of our colonial existence, 
that we may see, if possible, what is true on this 
subject. This seems to be the unerring method 
of coming at the truth. And if it shall appear, 
by such a comparison — fairly made — between 
States of equal age, where slavery and freedom 
have had a fair opportunity to produce their 
legitimate results, that in all the elements of 
prosperity, slaveholding States suffer nothing in 
the comparison — but that, in almost every partic- 
ular, are decidedly in advance of the non-slave- 
holding States, why then we are bound to let 
the testimony of these facts control our judg- 
ment. 

Every man and woman in the United States 
should not only be willing, but desirous to know, 
what is the matter-of-fact evidence on this all- 
absorbing question. It is but lately that any 
method existed, of coming at undisputed facts, 
which would throw light upon this subject. The 
Congress of the United States seeing this, thought 



OF SLA VERT. Ill 

proper to order that sucli facts as tend to demon- 
strate the relative prosperity of the different States 
of the Union, in religion — in morals — in the ac- 
quisition of wealth — in the increase of native 
population — in the prolongation of life — in the 
diminution of crime, &c, &c, should be ascer- 
tained, under oath, by competent and responsible 
agents, and that these facts should be publisbed 
at the national expense for the benefit of the peo- 
ple : so that the people could, understandingly, 
apply the corrective for evils that might be found 
to exist in one locality, and profit by a knowledge 
of the greater prosperity that might be found to 
exist in another locality. 

Up to that time, the non-slaveholding States 
affirmed, and the slaveholding States tacitly ad- 
mitted, that by this test, the slaveholding States 
must suffer in the comparison, in some important 
items. The facts which belong to the subject, 
are now before the world, in the census of 1850. 

It is my purpose to compare some of the most 
important of these facts, which have a bearing on 
this subject. I shall take for the most part, the 
six Xew England States, on one side, and the five 
old slave States, (extending from, and including 
Maryland and Georgia,) on the other side, for the 
comparison. 

I select these States, not because they are the 
richest, (for they are not.) but because they all 
lie on the Atlantic side of the Union — because 
they were all settled at or near the same time — 
because they have (within a fraction) an equal 



112 STATISTICAL VIEW 

free population — and because it has been con- 
stantly affirmed, and almost universally admitted, 
that the advantages of freedom, and the disad- 
vantages of slavery, have been more perfectly 
developed in these two sections, than they have 
been anywhere else in the United States. There 
have been no controlling circumstances at any 
time, since their first settlement, to neutralize the 
advantages of freedom on the one side, or to 
modify the evils of slavery on the other. Their 
mutual tendencies, without let or hindrance, have 
been in full and free operation for more than two 
centuries. This is surely a length of time quite 
sufficient to test the question now in controversy 
between the North and the South, as to the evils 
of slavery. 

The first facts I shall examine are those which 
throw light on the progress made in each of these 
two localities in religion. Of all the evils 
ascribed to slavery by the free men of the North, 
none equals, in their estimation, its deleterious 
tendency upon religion and morals. Indeed, such 
is the moral character, ascribed by many at the 
North, who call themselves Christians, to a 
Southern slaveholder, that no degree of personal 
piety, of which he can be the subject, will bring 
them to admit that he is anything but a God- 
abhorred miscreant, utterly unfit for the asso- 
ciation of honorable men, much less Christian 
men. 

In the outset of this examination, let me re- 
mark, that it is just and proper, in a comparative 



OF SLAVERY. 113 

estimate of the tendency of freedom and slavery 
upon religion and jpefcrSQs, in these two sections of 
our country, that due allowance be made for the 
moral and' religious character of the materials by 
vhich these two sections were originally settled. 
New England was settled by Puritans, who were 
remarkable for orthodox sentiments in religion — 
for high-toned religious conscientiousness, and a 
rigid personal piety ; while these five slave States 
were either settled, or received character from 
Cavaliers, who rather scoffed at pure religion, and 
were highly tinged with infidelity. 

The stream does not, in its flow onward, carry 
with more certainty the characteristics of the 
fountain, than does progressive society, generally, 
the moral, social, and religious characteristics of 
its origin. The five slave States, in this compari- 
son originated in a people of loose morals — 
strongly tinged with infidelity — and subjected, 
also, in their onward progress, to all the evil 
tendencies (if any there be) that are ascribed to 
slavery. 

At the end of more than two centuries, we are 
comparing the progress which these five siave 
States have made in religion, with the progress 
made by six non-slaveholding States, whose sub- 
jects, when originally organized into communities, 
were in advance, in personal piety and religious 
conscientiousness, of any communities that had 
then been founded since the days of the apos- 
tles — and that have been, in their onward pro- 
gress, from that time until this, free from all the 



114 STATISTICAL VIEW 

supposed evils of slavery. If infidelity and slav- 
ery be antagonistic element?, almost, if not 
altogether, too strong for moral control in a com- 
munity, it certainly ought not to seeuxTtrange, 
that with this original odds against them, these 
five old slave States should he found very far he- 
hind their more highly favored Northern neigh- 
bors in religious attainments. 

Eeligion being, at present, the subject of com- 
parison, it may be appropriate to remark fur- 
ther, that the Christian religion' is propagated 
by God's blessing upon the observance of his 
laws. 

The fundamental law of God, for its propagation 
requires the gospel to be preached to every crea- 
ture ; because, in the divine plan, faith in the 
gospel was to make men Christians. The gospel 
was to be made the power of God unto salvation, 
to every one that believeth. This faith was to be 
originated by hearing the gospel, for "faith comes 
by hearing." All those efforts, therefore, in a 
community _, which manifest the greatest solicitude 
on the part of the people, that the gospel should 
be heard, is credible evidence that the people who 
make these efforts, are the friends of Christ, and 
well-wishers to his cause. Now, all those means 
which are most likely to secure the ear of the 
people, are left by Christ to the discretion of his 
friends. They may use the market-places — the 
highways — the forests — or any other place, which 
in their judgment is most likely to get the ear of 
the people when the gospel is proclaimed. By 



OF SLAVERY. 115 

common consent, however, within the limits of 
Christian civilization, they have agreed that 
suitable houses, in which the people can meet to 
hear, the gospel, are the most suitable and proper 
means for securing the audience of the people, 
and as a consequence, the transforming power of 
the gospel upon the hearts and lives of those who 
hear. 

With these views to guide us in estimating the 
value of the facts to be examined, we proceed to 
disclosures made by the census of 1850. We 
there learn that the free population of New Eng- 
land is two million seven hundred and twenty- 
eight thousand and sixteen ; and that the free 
population of these five old slave States is two 
million seven hundred and thirty thousand two 
hundred and fourteen ; an excess of only two 
thousand one hundred and ninety-eight. This 
fraction we will drop out, and speak of them as 
equals. New England, then, with an equal pop- 
ulation, has erected four thousand six hundred 
and seven churches ; these five slave States have 
erected eight thousand and eighty-one churches. 
These New England churches will accommodate 
one million eight hundred and ninety-three thou- 
sand four hundred and fifty hearers; the churches 
of the five slave States will accommodate two 
million eight hundred and ninety-six thousand 
four hundred and seventy-two hearers. Thus we 
see that these slave States, with an equal free 
population, have erected nearly double the num- 
ber of churches, and furnished accommodation for 



110 STATISTICAL VIEW 

upwards of a million more persons, to hear the 
gospel, than can be accommodated in New Eng- 
land. In New England, nine hundred and thirty 
four thousand, five hundred and sixty-six of its 
population (which is nearly one-third) are ex- 
cluded from a seat in houses built for the purpose 
of enabling people to hear the gospel ; while in 
these five Southern States, there is room enough 
for every hearer that could be crowded into 
the churches of New England, and then enough 
left to accommodate more than a million of 
slaves. 

Including slaves, these five Southern States 
have a population of seven hundred and twenty 
thousand four hundred and ten more than New 
England ; yet while there are seven hundred and 
twenty thousand four hundred and ten persons 
less in New England to provide for, there are 
two hundred thousand more persons in New 
England wdio can't find a seat in the house of 
God to hear the gospel, than there are in these 
five slave States. 

The next fact set forth in the census, which I 
will examine, is equally suggestive. These four 
thousand six hundred and seven churches in New 
England are valued at nineteen million three 
hundred and sixty-two thousand six hundred and 
thirty-four dollars. These eight thousand and 
eighty-one churches in the five slave States are 
valued at eleven million one hundred and forty- 
nine thousand one hundred and eighteen dollars. 
Here is an immense expenditure in New England 



OP SLAVERY. 117 

to erect churches; yet wo see that those New En- 
gland churches, when erected, will seat one mil- 
lion three thousand and twenty-two persons less 
than those erected by the slave States, at a cost of 
eight million one hundred and thirteen. thousand 
five hundred and sixteen dollars less money. 
What prompted to such an expenditure as this? 
Was it worldly pride? or was it godly humility? 
Does it exhibit the evidence of humility, and a 
desire to glorify God, by a provision that shall 
_ enable all the people to hear the gospel? or does 
it exhibit the evidence of pride, that seeks to 
glorify the wealthy contributors, who occupy these 
costly temples to the exclusion of the humble 
poor? We must all draw our own conclusions. 
A mite, given to God from a right spirit, was de- 
clared by the Saviour to be more than all the 
costly gifts of wealthy pride, which were cast into 
the offerings of God. The Saviour informed the 
messenger of John the Baptist, that one of -the 
signs by which to decide the presence of the 
Messiah, was to be found in the fact that the 
poor had the gospel preached to them. When 
we exclude the poor, we may safely conclude wo 
exclude Christ. 

It is legitimate to conclude, therefore, that all 
the arrangements found among a people, which 
palpably defeat the preaching of the gospel to 
the poor, are arrangements which throw a shade 
of deep suspicion upon the character of those 
who make them. Costly palaces were never 
built for the poor; they are neither suitable nor 



118 STATISTICAL VIEW 

proper to secure the preaching of the gospel to 
every creature. 

There is still another fact revealed in the cen- 
sus, that furnishes material for reflection when 
the effects of slavery .upon religion are being 
tried. The six New England States were origin- 
ally settled by orthodox Christians — by men who 
manifested a very high regard for the interests of 
pure religion; the five slave States, by men who 
scoffed at religion, and who were subjected, also, 
to the so-called curse of slavery ; yet, at the , 
end of over two hundred years, we have to deduct 
from the four thousand six hundred and seven 
churches built up by New England orthodoxy 
and freedom, the astonishing number of two hun- 
dred and two Unitarian, and two hundred and 
eighty-five Universalist churches — while from the 
five slave States, we have to deduct from the 
eight thousand and eighty-one churches which 
they have built, only one Unitarian,, and seven 
Universalist churches. New England regards 
these four hundred and eighty-seven churches, 
which she has built, to be the product of blind 
guides, that are leaders of the blind. Is it not 
strange (she herself being judge) that New Eng- 
land orthodoxy and personal freedom should beget 
this vast amount of infidelity; while slaveholders 
and slavery have begotten so little of it in the 
same length of time? Is there nothing in all 
this to render the correctness of Northern views 
questionable, as to the deleterious tendency of 
slavery? The facts, however, are given to the 



OP SLAVERY, 119 

world in the census of 1850. All are left to draw 
from these facts their own conclusions. One of 
these conclusions must be, that there is something 
else in the world to corrupt religion and morals, 
besides slaveholders and slavery. 

It is not improper to refer to some historical 
facts in this connection, which are not in the 
census, but which, nevertheless, we all know to 
exist. There are isms at the North whose name 
is Legion. According to the universal standard 
of orthodoxy, we are compelled to exclude the 
subjects of these isms from the pale of Christianity. 
What the relative proportion is, North and South,, 
of such of these isms as have been nurtured into 
organized existence, we have no certain means of 
knowing — and I do not wish to do injustice, or to 
be offensive, in statements which are not suscepti- 
ble of proof by facts and figures — yet, I suppose 
that in the five slave States, a man might wear 
himself out in travel, and never find one of these 
isms with an organized, existence. To find a 
single individual, would be doing more than 
most men have done, with whom I am acquain- 
ted. But how is it in New England? The soil 
seems to suit them — they grow up like Jonah's 
gourd. Some are warring with great zeal against 
the social, and some against the religious institu- 
tions of society. Why is this? The institution 
of slavery has not produced, at the North, the 
moral obliquity, out of which they grow — a 
reverence for the Bible has not produced it. How 
is their existence, then, to be accounted for at the 



120 STATISTICAL VIEW 

North, under institutions, whose tendency is sup- 
posed to be so favorable to moral and religious 
prosperity? And how is their utter absence to 
be accounted for at the South, where the institu- 
tion of slavery is supposed to be so fatal to 
morality, religion and virtue? I will leave it for 
others to explain this fact. It is a mysterious 
fact, according' to the modes of reasoning at the 
North. It is assumed by the North, that slavery 
tends to produce social, moral and religious evils. 
This assumption is flatly contradicted by the facts 
of the census. These facts never can be explained 
by the New England theory. There was an ancient 
theory, held by men who were righteous in their 
own eyes, that no good thing could come out of 
Nazareth. By that theory Christ himself was 
condemned. It is not wonderful, therefore, that 
his friends should share the same fate. 

The next disclosure of the census, which we 
will compare, are those which relate to the social 
prosperity of a people. Are they wealthy? are 
they healthy? are they in conditions to raise 
families, &c? 

These questions indicate the elements which 
belong to the item now to be examined. States 
are made up of families. Wealth is a blessing in 
those States which have it so distributed, as to 
give the greatest number of homes to the families 
which compose them. Wealth, so distributed in 
States, as to diminish the number of homes, is a 
curse to the families which compose them. Home 
is the nursery and shield of virtue. No right- 



OF SLAVERY. 121 

minded man or woman, who had the means, 
could ever consent to have a family without a 
home; and no State should make wealth her 
boast, whose families are extensively without 
homes. 

New England has five hundred and eighteen, 
thousand five hundred and thirty-two families, 
and four hundred and forty-seven thousand seven, 
hundred and eighty-nine dwellings. The five 
slave States have five hundred and six thousand 
nine hundred and sixty-eight families, and four 
hundred and ninety-six thousand three hundred, 
and sixty-nine dwellings. Here we see the as- 
tonishing fact, that with an equal population, 
New England has eleven thousand five hundred 
and sixty-four more families than these five slave 
States, and that these five slave States have 
forty-eight thousand five hundred and eighty 
more dwellings than New England — so that New 
England actually has seventy thousand seven, 
hundred and forty-three families without a home. 
In New England one family in every seven is 
without a home, while in these five old slave 
States only one family in every fifty-two is without 
a home. 

According to the average number of persons 
composing a family, New England has three 
hundred and seventy-three thousand seven hun- 
dred of her people thrown upon the world with- 
out a place to call home. 

It is truly painful to think of the effects upon 
morals and virtue, which must flow from this 



122 STATISTICAL VIEW 

state of tilings; and it is a pleasure to a philan- 
thropic heart to think of the superior condition 
of the slave-holding people, who so generally 
have homes, where parents can throw the shield 
of protection around their offspring, and guard 
them against the dangers and demoralizing ten- 
dencies of an unprotected condition. 

There is another class of facts, equally aston- 
ishing, disclosed by the census, and which 
belong to the comparison we are now making, 
between States which were organized originally 
by Puritan orthodoxy and New England freedom 
on one side, and by infidel slaveholders and 
slavery on the other. They are facts which re- 
late to natural increase in a State. One of the 
boasts of Northern freemen is the increase of 
their population. With such a climate as New 
England, it was to be expected that the people 
would increase faster, and live longer, than in 
the climate of these five slave States. It is well 
known that a large portion of the population of 
these five Southern States have a fatal climate to 
contend with, and that everywhere else on the 
globe, under similar circumstances, a diminished 
increase of births, and an increased amount of 
deaths has been the result. But the census, as if 
disregarding climate, and slavery, and the uni- 
versal experience of all ages, testifies that there 
is twenty-seven per cent, more of births, and 
thirty-three per cent, less of deaths in the five 
old slave States, than there is in the six New 
England States. 



OF SLAVERY. 123 

New England, with an equal population, and 
eleven thousand five hundred and sixty-four more 
families, has sixteen thousand five hundred and 
thirty-four less annual births, and ten thousand 
one hundred and fifty-two more annual deaths, 
than these five sickly old Southern slave States. 
The annual births in New England are sixty-one 
thousand one hundred and forty-eight; and in 
the five slave States seventy-seven thousand six 
hundred and eighty-three. In New England the 
annual deaths are forty-two thousand three hun- 
dred and sixty-eight; in the five slave States 
thirty- two thousand two hundred and sixteen. 

In New England the ratio of births is one to 
forty-four; in the five slave States one to thirty- 
five. In New England the ratio of deaths is one 
to sixty-four ; in the five slave States it is one to 
eighty-five. 

The slaves are not in this estimate of births 
and deaths ; they £re in the census, however, and 
that shows that they multiply considerably faster, 
and are less liable to die than the freemen of 
New England. 

Here are facts which contradict all history and 
all experience. In a sickly Southern climate, 
among slaveholders,, people actually multiply 
faster, and die slower, than they do among free- 
men without slavery, in one of the purest and 
healthiest Northern climates in the world. How 
is this to be accounted for? Why do people 
multiply rapidly? Is it because they live in a 

healthy climate? Why do they die rapidly? Is 
f2 , 



124 STATISTICAL VIEW 

it because they live in a sickly climate? Our 
census contradicts both suppositions. Where, 
then, does the cause lie? Will excluding slavery 
from a community cause them to multiply more 
rapidly and die slower? The census says, No I 

The census testifies that the proportion of 
births is twenty-seven per cent, greater, and the 
proportion of deaths thirty-three per cent, less, 
among slaveholders, in a community where slav- 
ery has existed for more than two hundred years, 
under all the disadvantages of a sickly climate, 
than among free men in the pure climate of New 
England. A man, in his right mind, will de- 
mand an explanation of these astonishing facts. 
They are easily explained. The census discloses 
a degree of poverty in New England, which scat- 
ters seventy thousand families to the four winds 
of heaven, and feeds (as we shall presently see) 
the poor-house, with one hundred and thirty-five 
per cent, more of paupers than is found in these 
slave States. This is no condition of things to 
increase births, or diminish deaths, unless broth- 
els give increase, and squalid poverty the requisite 
sympathy and aid, to recover the sick and dying, 
from the period of infancy to' that of old age. 

We proceed to compare other facts, which have 
a bearing upon the relative merits of different in- 
stitutions in securing social prosperity. 

In every country there is a class to be found in 
such utter destitution, that they must either be 
supported by charity, or perish of want. This 
destitution arises, generally, from oppressive ex- 



OF SLAVERY. 125 

actions or excessive vice, and is evidence of the 
tendency of social institutions, and the superior- 
ity of one over another, in securing the greatest 
amount of individual prosperity and comfort. 

With these views to aid us, we will compare 
some facts belonging to New England and these 
five old slave States. With an equal population, 
New England has thirty-three thousand four 
hundred and thirty-one paupers; these five slave 
States have fourteen thousand two hundred and 
twenty-one. Here is an excess of paupers in New 
England, notwithstanding her boasted prosperity, 
of one hundred and thirty-five per cent, over these 
five slave States. And if to these continual pau- 
jiers we were to add the number (as given in State 
returns) that are partially aided in New England, 
the addition would be awful. But I suppose New 
England will strive to wipe off this stain of regu- 
lar pauperism, by throwing the blame of it upon 
the fore igners among them. It should be remem- 
bered, however, as an offset to this, that these for- 
eigners are all from non-slaveholding countries. 
From their infancy they have shared the bless- 
ings of freedom and free institutions; therefore 
they ought to be admitted, as homogeneous ma- 
terials, in the social organizations of New En- 
gland, which we are now comparing with South- 
ern slaveholding communities. 

But as foreign paupers are distinguished in the 

census from native-born citizens, w T e will now (in 

the comparison) exclude them in both sections. 

The number of paupers will then be, for New 

f3 



126 STATISTICAL VIEW 

England, eighteen thousand nine hundred and 
sixty-six ; for the five slave States, eleven thou- 
sand seven hundred and twenty-eight — leaving 
to New England, which is considered the model 
section of the world in all that is lovely in reli- 
gious and social prosperity, seven thousand two 
hundred and thirty-eight more of her native sons 
in the poor-house, (or nearly seventy per cent.,) 
than are to be found in this condition in an equal 
population in these five Southern States. 

The ratio of New England's native sons in the 
poor-house is one to one hundred and forty-three; 
of these five slave States one to two hundred and 
thirty-four. The ratio of New England's entire 
population in the poor-house is one to eighty-one; 
the ratio of the entire population of these five 
slave States is one to one hundred and seventy- 
one. 

The Saviour asks if a good tree can bring forth 
evil fruit, or an evil tree good fruit. Here is an 
exhibition of the fruit borne by Neiu England- 
freedom and Southern slavery. The Saviour gives 
every man a right to judge the tree by the fruit, 
and declares such to be righteous judgment. 

There is another item in the census which 
throws much light on the comparative comfort 
and happiness of the people in these two locali- 
ties. It is neither physical destitution, criminal 
degradation, nor mental suffering ; but it is an 
effect which is known to flow from one, or the 
other, or all three of these conditions as causes ; 
therefore it is an important item in determining 



OF SLAVERY. 127 

tlic amount of destitution, degradation and suffer- 
ing, which exist in a community. 

When we see effects which are known to flow 
from certain causes — the causes may be conceal- 
ed — yet we know that they exist by the effects we 
see. With these remarks I proceed to state a 
fact disclosed in the census, as it exists in New 
England, and as it exists in these five old slave 
States. 

In New England, with an equal population, 
we find that three thousand eight hundred and 
twenty-nine of her white children have been 
crushed by sufferings of some sort, to the condi- 
tion of insanity, while in these five old slave 
States there are only two thousand three hundred 
and twenty-six of her white children who have 
been called to suffer, in their earthly pilgrimage, 
a degree of anguish beyond mental endurance. 
Here is a difference of more than sixty per cent, 
in favor of these five States, as to conditions of 
suffering that are beyond endurance among men. 
Very poor evidence this, of the superior happiness 
and comfort of New England. 

But while her white children are called to suf- 
fer over sixty per cent, more of these crushing 
sorrows than those of these five States, how is it 
with her black children in freedom, compared 
with the family here in slavery, from which the 
most of them have fled, that they might enjoy the 
blessings of liberty? It is exceedingly interesting 

to see the benefits and blessings which New Eng- 
f4 



128 STATISTICAL VIEW 

land freedom and Puritan sympathy have confer- 
red upon them. 

Here are the facts of the census upon this 
suhject : 

Among the free negroes of New England, one 
is deaf or dumb for every three thousand and 
five; while among the slaves of these States 
there is only one for every six thousand five hun- 
dred and fifty-two. In New England one free 
negro is blind for every eight hundred and sev- 
enty ; while in these States there is only one 
blind slave for every two thousand six hundred 
and forty-five. In New England there is one 
free negro insane or an idiot for every nine hun- 
dred and eighty ; while in these States there is 
but one slave for every three thousand and 
eighty. 

Can any man bring himself to believe, with 
these facts before him, that freedom in New Eng- 
land has proved a blessing to this race of people, 
or that slavery is to them a curse in the Southern 
States? In non-slaveholding States, money will 
be the master of poverty. The facts enumerated 
show the fruits of such a relation the world over. 
The slave of money, while nominally free, has 
none to care for him at those periods, and in 
those conditions of his life, when he is not able 
to render service or labor. Childhood, old age, 
and sickness, are conditions which make sympa- 
thy indispensable. Nominal freedom, combined 
with poverty, cannot secure it in those conditions, 



OF SLAVERY. 129 

because it cannot render service or labor. The 
slave of the South enjoys this sympathy in all 
conditions from birth till death. There is a 
spontaneous heart-felt flow of it, to sooth his 
sorrows, to supply his wants, and to smooth his 
passage to the grave. Interest, honor, humani- 
ty, public opinion, and the law, all combine to 
awaken it, and to promote its activity. 

Many facts of the character here examined 
have been disclosed in State statistics, and others 
in the Federal census; some of which I shall 
hereafter notice, that show with the most unques- 
tionable certainty, that freedom to this race, in 
our country, is a curse. 

The facts which we have now examined, if 
they prove anything, prove that religion has pros- 
pered more among slaveholders at the South, 
than it has among free men in New England. 
Slaveholders have made a much more extensive 
and suitable provision for the people of all classes 
to hear the gospel, than has been made by the 
freemen of New England. Slaveholders have 
almost entirely frowned down the attempts of 
blind-guides to corrupt the gospel, or mislead the 
people. Among them organized bodies to over- 
throw the moral, social, and religious institutions 
of society, are unknown. 

If the facts already examined prove anything, 
they prove that wealth, among slaveholders, is 
much more equally distributed — so that very few, 
compared with New England, are without homes. 

The facts examined prove also, beyond ques- 

FO 



130 STATISTICAL VIEW 

tion, that the unbearable miseries which have 
their source in the heartless exactions of exces- 
sive wealth, or extreme poverty, are more than 
sixty per cent, greater in New England than in 
these States, and that one hundred and thirty-five 
per cent, more of New England's toiling millions 
have to bear the degradation of the poor-house, 
or die of want, than are to be found in this con- 
dition in these five slave States. 

The facts we have examined, prove also, that 
under all the disadvantages of climate, the natu- 
ral increase of the slave States is sixty per cent, 
greater than it is in New England — twenty-seven 
per cent, of it by increased annual births, aud 
thirty-three per cent, of it by diminished annual 
deaths. These are the most astonishing facts 
ever presented to the world. They speak a lan- 
guage that ought to be read and studied by all 
men. In the present state of our country they 
ought to be prayerfully pondered and not disre- 
garded. 

But notwithstanding all this, the aggregate 
wealth of New England is a source of exultation 
and pride among her sons. They believe, with a 
blind and stubborn tenacity, that slavery tends to 
poverty, and freedom to wealth. 

It cannot be denied that the aggregate earnings 
of the toiling millions — when hoarded by a few — 
may grow faster than it will when these millions 
are allowed to take from it a daily supply, equal 
to their reasonable wants. And it cannot be 



OF SLAVERY. 13 1 

denied that New England has great aggregate 
wealth. 

The facts of the census show, however, that it 
is very unequally divided among her people. 
The question now to be tried is, whether the few 
in New England have hoarded this wealth, and 
can now slioio it, or whether they have squan- 
dered it upon their lusts, and are unable to 
shoiv it. 

This last and prominent boast of increased 
aggregate wealth in New England, over that 
accumulated by slaveholders, we will now test 
by the census of 1850. This is the standard 
adopted by our National Legislature for its deci- 
sion. 

Before we examine the facts, however, let a 
few reflections which belong to the subject be 
weighed. 

The people of these five slave States are now, 
and ever have been, an agricultural people. The 
people of the New England States are a commer- 
cial and manufacturing people. New England 
has, in proportion to numbers, the richest and 
most extensive commerce in the world. In man- 
ufacturing skill and enterprise they have no 
superiors on the globe. They have ever reproach- 
ed the South for investing their income in slave- 
labor, in preference to commerce and manufac- 
tures. It has been the settled conviction among 
nations, that investments in commerce and man- 
ufactures give the greatest, and those in agricul- 
f6 



132 STATISTICAL VIEW 

ture the smallest profits. It is the settled convic- 
tion of the non-slaveholding States that invest- 
ments in slave-labor, for agricultural purposes, is 
the worst of all investments, and tends greatly 
to lessen its profits. This has been proclaimed 
to the South so long by our Northern neighbors, 
that many here have been brought to believe it, 
and to regret the existence of slavery among us 
on that account, if on no other. With these 
observations we turn to the census. 

The census of 1850 tells us that New England, 
with a population now numbering two million 
seven hundred and twenty-eight thousand and 
sixteen, with all the advantages of a commercial 
and manufacturing investment, and with the 
most energetic and enterprising free men on 
earth, to give that investment its greatest pro- 
ductiveness, has accumulated wealth, in some- 
thing over two hundred years, to the amount of 
one billion three million four hundred and sixty- 
six thousand one hundred and eighty-one dollars; 
while these five slave States, with an equal popu- 
lation, have, in the same time, accumulated 
wealth to the amount of one billion four hundred 
and twenty million nine hundred and eighty-nine 
thousand five hundred and seventy-three dollars. 
Here we see the indisputable fact that these 
five agricultural States, with slavery, have accu- 
mulated an excess of aggregate wealth over the 
amount accumulated in New England in the same 
time, of four hundred and seventeen million five 
hundred and twenty-three thousand three hun- 



OF SLAVERY, 133 

tired and two dollars — so that the property be- 
longing to New England, if equally divided, 
would give to each citizen but three hundred and 
sixty-seven dollars, while that belonging to the 
five slave States, if equally divided, would give 
to each citizen the sum of live hundred and 
twenty dollars — a difference in favor of each citi- 
zen in these five slave States of one hundred and 
fifty-three dollars. 

I am aware, however, of an opinion that some 
other non-slaveholding States, have been much 
more successful in the accumulation of wealth, 
than the six New England States, and that New 
York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, are of this favor- 
ed number. Lest a design to deceive, by conceal- 
ing this supposed fact, should be attributed to the 
writer, we will see what the census says as to 
these three more favored States. By the census 
of 1850 we learn that New York, instead of being 
able to divide three hundred and sixty-seven dol- 
lars with her citizens, as New England could 
with hers, is only able to divide two hundred and 
thirty-one dollars; Pennsylvania two hundred 
and fourteen, and Ohio two hundred and nine- 
teen. These several averages among freemen at 
the North, and in New England, stand against 
the average of five hundred and twenty dollars, 
which these five old impoverished Southern slave 
States could divide with their citizens. 

These facts must astonish our Northern neigh- 
bors, so long accustomed to believe that slavery 
was the fruitful source of poverty, with all its 



134 STATISTICAL VIEW 

imagined evils ; and these facts will astonisli 
many at the South, so long accustomed to hear it 
affirmed that slavery had produced these evils, 
and while they were without the means of know- 
ing, of course they feared that it was so. 

That everything may appear, however, which 
will throw additional light on the suhject, I will 
state that Massachusetts, which is the richest non- 
slaveholding State, could divide with each of her 
citizens five hundred and forty-eight dollars. 
But on the other hand, South Carolina could 
divide one thousand and one dollars, Louisiana 
eight hundred and six dollars, Mississippi seven 
hundred and two dollars, and Georgia six hun- 
dred and thirty-eight dollars, with their citizens. 

Rhode Island, which is the next richest non- 
slaveholding State to that of Massachusetts, could 
divide with her citizens five hundred and twenty- 
six dollars; one other non-slaveholding State 
(Connecticut) could divide with her citizens three 
hundred and twenty-one dollars. After this,, the 
next highest non-slaveholding State could divide 
two hundred and eighty ; the next highest two 
hundred and thirty-one; the next highest two 
hundred and twenty-eight ; the next highest two 
hundred and nineteen ; the next highest two hun- 
dred and fourteen dollars. After this, the divi- 
sion ranges, among the non-slaveholding States, 
from one hundred and sixty-six down to one hun- 
dred and thirty-four dollars— which last sum is 
the amount that the so-called rich and pros- 



OF SLAVERY. loo 

perous Illinois could divide with, her popula- 
tion. 

In the slaveholding States that are less wealthy 
than South Carolina, Louisiana, Mississippi, and 
Georgia., already noticed ; Alabama could divide 
with her citizens five hundred and eleven dollars; 
Maryland four hundred and twenty-three ; Vir- 
ginia four hundred and three ; Kentucky three 
hundred and seventy-seven ; and North Carolina 
three hundred and sixty-seven. All these States 
are much richer than the third richest non-slave- 
holding State of the Union, viz : Connecticut. 
After this, Tennessee could divide two hundred 
and forty-eight dollars, and Missouri, which is 
the poorest of all the slave States, one hundred 
and sixty-six dollars. 

We will now give the general average of 
the non-slaveholding States, (California excepted, 
which in 1850 had not had time to exhibit any 
fixed character,) and then the general average of 
the slave-holding States of the whole Union. 

The population of all the free States is thirteen 
million two hundred and fourteen thousand three 
hundred and eighty ; the free population of all 
the slave States is six million three hundred and 
twelve thousand eight hundred and ninety-nine. 
These thirteen million two hundred and fourteen 
thousand three hundred and eighty of freemen 
have accumulated an aggregate of property esti- 
mated at three billion one hundred and eighty-six 
million six hundred and eighty-three thousand 



136 STATISTICAL VIEW 

eight hundred and twenty-four dollars; while 
these six million three hundred and twelve thou- 
sand eight hundred and ninety-nine of slave- 
holders have accumulated an aggregate of two 
hillion seven hundred and seventy-five million 
one -hundred and twenty-one thousand, six hun- 
dred and forty-four dollars' worth of property. 

Here we see that a population of Northern free- 
men, one hundred and nine per cent, greater than 
the number of Southern freemen in the slave 
States, have accumulated hut sixteen per cent, 
more of property. 

In a division of the property accumulated by 
all the non-slaveholding States, it will give to 
each citizen two hundred and thirty-three dollars; 
while all accumulated by the various slave States, 
will give to each citizen four hundred and thirty- 
nine dollars — nearly double. Were we to give 
the slaves an equal share with the whites, in an 
average division of aggregate wealth, the slave- 
holding States, with their slaves included, would 
then be able to give each person two hundred and 
ninety-one dollars instead of two hundred and 
thirty-three dollars, which is all the free States 
have to divide with their people. 

Is it possible, with these facts before us, to 
believe that slavery tends to poverty. Such is 
the testimony of the census on the relative wealth 
of these two sections of our country. It proves 
that slavery, as an agricultural investment, is 
more profitable than an investment in commerce 
and manufactures. The facts which have been 



OF SLAVERY. 13*7 

reviewed prove with equal clearness, that where 
slavery exists, the white race, and the black, have 
prospered more in their religious, social and 
moral condition, than either race has prospered, 
where slavery has been excluded. We see that 
an increased amount of poverty and wretched- 
ness has to be borne in New England by both 
races. Ecclesiastical statistics will show an in- 
creased amount of prosperity in religion that is 
overwhelming. 

Such is the prostration of moral restraint at 
the North, that, in their/ cities, standing armies 
are necessary to guard the persons and property 
of unoffending citizens, and to execute the laws 
upon reckless offenders. This state of things is 
unknown in the slave States. 

The census shows that slavery has been a bless- 
ing to the white race in these slave States. They 
have prospered more in religion, they have more 
homes, are wealthier, multiply faster, and live 
longer than in New England, and they are ex- 
empt from the curse of organized infidelity and 
lawless violence. 

A comparison of the slave's condition at the 
South, with that of his own race in freedom at 
the South, shows with equal clearness, that slav- 
ery, in these States, has been, and now is, a bless- 
ing to this race of people in all the essentials of 
human happiness and comfort. Our slaves all 
have homes, are bountifully provided for in 
health, cared for and kindly nursed in childhood, 
sickness and old age; multiply faster, live longer, 



138 STATISTICAL VIEW 

are free from all the corroding ills of poverty and 
anxious care, labor moderately, enjoy the bless- 
ings of the gospel, and let alone by wicked men, 
are contented and happy. 

Ex-Governor Smith, a few years past, in his 
message to the Legislatures of this State, showed, 
if I remember correctly, that seven-tenths more 
of crime was chargeable to free negroes than to 
the whites and slaves. By the census of 1850, 
the ratio of whites in the Penitentiary of Vir- 
ginia, for ten years, was one to twenty-three 
thousand and three, while the ratio for the free 
negroes was one to three thousand and one. For 
the same length of time, in the Penitentiary of 
Massachusetts, the average of whites was one to 
seven thousand five hundred and eighty-seven, 
instead of one to twenty-three thousand and 
three, as in Virginia; and in Massachusetts the 
average of free negroes in the Penitentiary, for 
this length of time, was one to two hundred and 
fifty, instead of one to three thousand and one, 
as in Virginia. Here we see that for an average 
of ten years, two hundred and fifty free negroes 
at the North, commit annually as much crime as 
twenty-three thousand and three white persons at 
the South ; and that two-hundred and fifty free 
negroes, in a non-slaveholding State, commit 
annually as much crime as three thousand and 
one free negroes in a slaveholding State. We 
see, also, that seven thousand five hundred and 
eighty-seven white persons at the North, commit 
annually as much crime as twenty-three thousand 



OF SLAVERY. 13 ( J 

and three white persons commit at the South. In 
the cities, criminal degradation at the North is 
from three to five times greater with the whites 
than at the South, and from ten to ninety-three 
times greater with the free negroes at the North, 
than with the whites at the South, and about 
twelve times greater than with the free negroes 
at the South. 

The Federal census, and the State records, 
show not very far from this proportion of crimi- 
nal degradation, chargeable to this race of people 
when invested with the freedom of Neiv England. 
Can we, with these facts before us, think that 
freedom to this race, in our country, is a blessing 
to them? 

In Africa, the condition of the aborigines in 
freedom is now, and ever has been, as much be- 
low that of their enslaved sons in these States, as 
the condition of a brute, is beneath that of a 
man. Slavery is becoming, to this people, so 
manifestly a blessing in our country, that fugi- 
tives from labor are constantly returning to their 
masters again, after tasting the blessings, or 
rather the awful curse to them, of freedom in 
non-slaveholding States; and while I write, those 
who are lawfully free in this State, are praying 
our Legislature for a law that will allow them to 
become slaves. 

But before I dismiss the subject of wealth en- 
tirely, let me remark, that while the census 
testifies that an agricultural people, with African 
slave-labor, increases wealth iaster than free- 



140 STATISTICAL VIEW 

labor, employed in agriculture, manufactures and 
commerce, yet reason demands that it should be 
satisfactorily accounted for. It is well known 
that laboring freemen at the North are more 
skillful, work longer in a day, labor harder while 
at it, live on cheaper food, and less of it, than 
laborers at the South. 

How, then, is it to be accounted for that the 
aggregate increase of wealth is less with them 
than it is with Southern slaveholders? Among 
many reasons that might be assigned, I will 
mention three. The first is, that half the people 
at the North (this is ascertained to be about the 
amount) live in villages, towns and cities. The 
second reason is, that the cost of living in cities 
(as has been ascertained) is about double what it 
is in the country — to this cost we must add, for 
the imprudent indulgences of 'pride and fashion; 
and to this w r e must add, for a thousand indi- 
gencies, in violation of moral propriety, all of 
which are almost unknown in country life. The 
third reason is to be found in the great amount of 
pauperism and crime produced by city life. In 
the city of New York, for instance, according to 
the American Almanac, there were received in 
1847, at the principal alms-houses of he city, 
twenty-eight thousand six hundred and ninety- 
two persons, and out-door relief was given from 
the public funds to thirty-four thousand five 
hundred and seventy-two more — making in all 
seventy-three thousand two hundred and sixty- 
four persons, or one out of every five, in the city 



OF SLAVERY. 141 

of New York, dependent, more or less, on public 
charity. The total cost of this, to the city, was 
three hundred and nineteen thousand two hun- 
dred and ninety-three dollars and eighty-eight 
cents. In 1849, in the Mayor's message, the 
estimate for the same thing is four hundred 
thousand dollars. In Massachusetts, according 
to the report of the Secretary of State in 1848, 
the number of constant and occasional paupers, 
in the ivholc State, was one to every twenty of 
the whole population. The proportion in the 
cities, I suppose, would equal New York, which, 
as we have seen, is one to five. To this 'public 
burden in cities we must add an immense unknown 
amount of private charity, which is not needed in 
country life. 

Crime in Northern cities keeps pace wi^h 
pauperism. In Boston, according to official State 
reports a few years past, one person out of every 
fourteen males, and one out of every twenty-eight 
females, was arraigned for criminal offences. 
According to the census of 1850, there were in 
the State of Massachusetts, in a population of 
nine hundred and ninety-four thousand five hun- 
dred and fourteen, the number of seven thousand 
two hundred and fifty convictions for crime. In 
Virginia, the same year, in a population of one 
million four hundred and twenty-one thousand 
six hundred and sixty-one, there were one hun- 
dred and seven convictions for crime. 

In the State of New York the proportion of 
crime is about the same as in Massachusetts. In 



142 STATISTICAL VIEW 

the city of New York, in 1848 or 1849, there 
were sentenced to the State Prison one hundred 
and nineteen men and seventeen women; to the 
Penitentiary seven hundred men and one hundred 
and seventy women; to the City Prison one hun- 
dred and sixty-two men and sixty-seven women — 
making a total of one thousand two hundred and 
thirty-five criminals. Here is an amount of crime 
in a single city, that equals all in the fifteen slave 
States together. In the State of New York, ac- 
cording to the census of 1850, there was, in a 
population of three million and ninety-seven 
thousand three hundred and four, the numher of 
ten thousand two hundred and seventy-nine con- 
victions for crime; while in South Carolina, in 
a population of six hundred and sixty-eight 
thousand five hundred and seven, (which is con- 
siderably over one-fifth) there were only forty-six 
convictions for crime. 

To live in cities filled with such an amount of 
poverty and criminal degradation, as the census 
discloses, at the North, standing armies of police- 
men, firemen, &c, are absolutely necessary to 
secure the people against lawless violence. Now 
suhstract from the products of labor the cost of 
city life — the cost of vain and criminal indulgen- 
ces, the support of paupers, and the machinery to 
guard innocence and punish crime — and the 
wonder ceases that wealth accumulates slowly — 
the wonder is that it accumulates at all. What is 
accumulated, must be principally from commerce 
and manufactures. The system of abandoning 



OF SLAVERY. 143 

the country and congregating in cities, tends 
directly to concentrate wealth into the hands of a 
few, and to diffuse poverty and crime among the 
masses of the people. 

The facts of poverty and crime at the Forth, 
which are exhibited by the census, will help to 
explain the seeming mystery that the South mul- 
tiplies by natural increase faster than the North. 
In 18-45, according to her statistical report, 
Massachusetts had seven-eighths of her marriage- 
able young women working, in factories under 
male overseers. The census of 1840 shows that, 
with fewer adults, Virginia had one hundred 
thousand more children than Massachusetts. In 
the census of 1850 the proportion in favor of 
Virginia is still greater. 

Pauperism, in Massachusetts and New York, 
according to the State census, increased between 
1836 and 1848 ten times faster than wealth or 
population. 

In the slaveholding States there is less than a 
tenth of the people in cities — pauperism is almost 
unknown — the people are on farms — the style of 
living is less costly by half, but greatly superior 
in quality and comfort — according to the census, 
there is but little crime — almost all have homes — 
the amount of agricultural labor does not fluctu- 
ate — the farms are not cultivated by the spado 
and hoe, but are large enough to justify a system 
of enlarged agricultural operations by the aid of 
horse power. The result is that more is saved, 
and the proceeds more equally distributed be- 



144 STATISTICAL VIEW 

tween capital and labor, or the rich and the 
poor. 

The South did not seek or desire the responsi- 
bility, and the onerous burden, of civilizing and 
christianizing these degraded savages; but God, 
in his mysterious providence, brought it about. 
He allowed England, and her Puritan sons at the 
North, from the love of gain, to become the 
-willing instruments, to force African slaves upon 
the Cavaliers of the South. These Cavaliers 
were a noble race of men. They remonstrated 
against this outrage to the last. They preferred 
indented labor from the mother country, which 
they were securing as they needed it. A de- 
scendant of theirs, in drafting the Declaration of 
Independence, made this outrage one of the 
prominent causes for dissolving all political con- 
nection with the mother country. But God in- 
tended (as we now see) to bless these savages, by 
forcing us against our wills, to become their 
masters and guardians ; and he has abundantly 
blessed us, also, (as we now see) for allowing his 
word to be our counsellor in this relation. We 
were forced by his word to' admit the relation to 
be lawful, and he enabled us to admit and feel 
the great responsibility devolved upon us as their 
divinely appointed protectors. 

The North, after pocketing the price of these 
savages, refused to bear any part of the burden of 
training and elevating them ; and finally, with 
France and England, turned them loose by eman- 
cipation, and ignored the Word of God in justifi- 



OF SLAVERY. 145 

cation of the deed, by declaring that to hold 
them in slavery was sinful. The result is, that 
the portion they held of this degraded race, is 
immersed in poverty, wretchedness and crime, 
without a parallel in civilized communities, and 
are less in number now, than the original impor- 
tations from Africa, (so says the Superintendent 
of the census;) while the portion held by us is in 
high comfort, regularly improving in morals and 
intellect, and multiplying more rapidly than the 
white race at the North. It does seem, from the 
facts of the census, that this (so-called) philan- 
thropy has been a curse to both races, at the 
North, and in the West Indies, and that it is dis- 
pleasing in the sight of God. The census ex- 
hibits unmistakable evidence that, without a 
change, the emancipated portion of the race, in 
these localities, will ultimately perish, and that 
this catastrophe is to be hastened by poverty and 
criminal degradation. The census shows that 
those who are responsible for this deed are sub- 
jected in our country, by annual births and deaths, 
to a decrease of sixty per cent., and to a much 
heavier per cent, than this, of poverty and crime. 

But while these are the results to both races at 
the North, prosperity, unequaled in the annals 
of the world, has attended us (as the census 
shows) in almost everything we have put our 
hands to, both for this life and that which is to 
come. The satisfaction is ours, also, of hnowing 
that these degraded outcasts, which were thrown 
Tipon our hands, have not only been cared for, 

G 



146 STATISTICAL VIEW 

but elevated in the scale of being, and brought to 
share largely in the blessings of intellectual, 
social and religious culture. 

But for their enslaved condition here, they 
would have remained until this hour in their 
original degradation. 

In view of all the facts compared, I would ask 
all who feel interested in the great question now 
agitating our country, to let these facts be their 
guide and counsellor in deciding the issue. Are 
the people of the North warranted from these 
facts, in believing they would honor God and 
benefit men by overthrowing the institution of 
slavery, if they could. 

These facts testify plainly,, that where African 
slavery has existed in our country for more than 
two hundred years, the social and religious con- 
dition of men has improved more rapidly than it 
has under the best arrangements of exclusive 
freedom. 

These facts show that, with the advantages of 
the best location and climate upon the globe, 
and a high degree of moral, religious and social 
intelligence to commence with, those communities 
at the North who excluded this element from their 
organizations, are actually behind slaveholding 
communities, in religion, in wealth, in the in- 
crease of their race, and in the comforts of their 
condition. If this be so, (and the census testifies 
that it is,) what will justify the North in efforts 
to involve both sections of our country in civil 
war and disunion, boranso slaverv exists in one 



OF .SLAVERY. 147 

section of it? And if the institution of African 
slavery has certainly improved the condition of 
both races in our country, (and the census testi- 
fies that it has,) why should they hazard all the 
blessings vouchsafed to the North and the South 
sooner than suffer its expansion over new terri- 
tory? 

The expansion of African slavery (according to 
the test by which we are now trying it) has 
never yet done injury in this Union. In Texas 
slaveholders were called to organize a State, (not 
in this Union at the time,) which in 1850 had a 
population of two hundred and twelve thousand 
five hundred and ninety-two. The individuals 
composing it originally, were the most lawless set 
of adventurers that ever lived. Did slavery dis- 
qualify slaveholders from organizing a social 
body, even out of these materiel s, that could 
secure the highest results in human progress? 
What is now the social, moral and religious com- 
plexion of Texas ? In the essentials of prosperity 
it is ahead, under equal circumstances, of any 
portion of the Union. Slaveholders, in the provi- 
dence of God, had to organize States on the 
Gulf of Mexico, and on the banks of the Missis- 
sippi, after the acquisition of Louisiana from 
France, and Florida from Spain. The original 
materials (numbering upwards of seventy thou- 
sand) of which these States were composed, had 
been trained under the most pernicious system of 
morals that ever existed among a civilized people. 
The result in this case, also, will testify that 



148 STATISTICAL VIEW 

slavery does not paralyze communities in the 
accumulation of wealth, or in the correction of 
moral, social and religious evils. The census 
shows that in all these items these new slave 
States which have been added to our Union, have 
greatly outstripped their non-slaveholding equals 
in age. The temples of the Lord are now seen 
studding these slaveholding localities over, and 
are vocal with his praise — the moral majesty of 
the law is a paramount power. The amount of 
paupers and criminals, in some of them, is less 
than one-seventieth part that is chargeable to 
some of their twin sisters of equal age, (who are 
free*) nurseries of literature and science are 
multiplying rapidly, and promising the highest 
results — prosperity, in these slaveholding com- 
munities, is crowning the efforts of good men to 
arrest vice, to promote virtue, to diminish want, 
to create plenty, and to arrange the elements of 
progress for the highest social, moral and religious 
results. 

There is another historical fact which deserves 
to be weighed, in making up a judgment on the 
expansion of slavery. Within the present cen- 
tury, the colonies of Mexico and South America, 
in imitation of our example, threw off the 
colonial yoke, and established independent gov- 
ernments. All of these States, except one, pre- 
ferred the non-slaveholding model, and excluded 
the element of slavery: that one, which is Brazil, 

Trxas and Michigan: see also, Arkansas and Indiana, Florida and Wis- 
consin. 



OF SLAVERY. 149 

preferred tlie model adopted by the Southern 
States of this Union, and retained African slav- 
ery. 

All of those States, which excluded slave ry, 
have hecn visited,, in rapid succession, with insur- 
rection, revolution, and fearful anarchy ; while 
Brazil has enjoyed tranquility, from the com- 
mencement of her independent political existence 
until the present hour. This remarkable fact 
has occurred, too, in a State where the slaves are 
two to one of the other race. The slaves in the 
United States are one to two of the other race. 
Is not this fact, like all those examined, God's 
providential voice? and does he not, in these facts, 
speak a language that we can read and under- 
stand .' 

Now shall we, in view of these facts, rebel 
against the teachings of His providence, as it is 
now made known to us in the census, and claim, 
for ourselves more wisdom than he has displayed, 
in allowing such results to be the product of slave- 
holding communities ? 

We cannot put an end to African slavery, if Ave 
would — and we ought not, if we could — until God 
opens a door to moke its termination a Messina, 
and not a curse. When He does that, slavery in 
this Union will end. 

With Christian affection, yours. 

THORNTON STKINi JFELLOW. 



■: - 



i • 



» * VI 



i\ \!\M 






¥ 1 



SS-- 



& © © K © 

PUBLISHED BY 

J. "W . KAXDOLPH, 

. ,'E'S masonic text book, 

New edition, plates, 12mo muslin, - - - - 9 l 25 

OVE's VIRGINIA TEXT BOOK OF ROYAL ARCH MASONRY, 

plates, 12rao muslin, - - - - - * ^5 

-vVES masonic constitutions, 

12mo muslin, - ... 75 

VIRGINIA STATE AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY TRANSACTIONS, 

to 1&53, Svo paper, ----- 60 

PAJOT'S OBSTETRIC TABLES, 

Translated and arranged by Crenshaw & McCaw, 4to boards, - 1 25 

PHYSICIANS' POCKET TABULATED DIARY, 

By a physician of Virginia, muslin, - ' -- - - 50 

HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA — 

Jefferson and Cabell Correspondence, Svo muslin, - - 2 50 

VIRGINIA RESOLUTIONS AND DEBATES, OF 1798 — '9, 

new edition, 8vo % calf, - - - - 1 50 

STATISTICS OF VIRGINIA TO 1850, 

From official documents, 8vo calf, - - - - a 50 

PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE VIRGINIA CONVENTION, 

of 1829— '£0, Svo calf, - - . . 2 50 

.KER'S LECTURES ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 

12mo muslin, - 75 

JKER'S LECTURES ON NATURAL LAW AND GOVERNMENT, 

12mo muslin, - 75 

TRIAL OF T. RITCHIE, JR., FOR KILLING J. H. PLEASANTS, 

Svo paper, ---... 35 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

00011320^10 



